REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE 


3'K 2^4 4 

;L* M 

170 


OF THE 


GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF LOUISIANA 


t 


OX THE 


CONDUCT OF THE ELECTION 


OF APRIL 17 AND 18, 1868, 


AND THE 


CONDITION OF PEACE AND ORDER IN THE STATE. 








'■EANS* 

A? PBINTER. 


A. L. L3 


















































REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE 


OF THE 



GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF LOUISIANA 


/ 


ON THE 



OF MMOL 17 AND 18, 18G8, 


AND THE 


CONDITION OF PEACE AND ORDER IN THU STATE. 






A. 


NEW ORLEANS: 

STATE PIUNTEll. 

1870. 



























* 

«* 




'V 



:(>Y 


■ rtjkl) K Jk 



■ 'r 

r 


























/ 














e> 

P 

<4 

r 1 1 v 

REPORT 

ON THE 

CONDUCT OF ELECTIONS. 


ROOMS JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE CONDUCT OE ELECTIONS AND 
THE CONDITION OF PEACE AND ORDER, 

New Orleans, Louisiana, February 22, 1869. 

To the Honorable President and Members of the Senate, and the Speaker and 
Members of the House of Representatives of the General Assembly, State of 
Louisi«a : 

Gentlemen— Your Committee respectfully present the following 
testimony on the conduct of the election in April, 1868. 

Tlie result of this examination shows that the judges and sheriffs 
of the parish of Orleans and the municipal officers of the city of 
New Orleans who were declared elected by the order of General 
Buchanan, were in reality defeated on the popular vote actually cast, 
by majorities ranging from five hundred to thirteen hundred votes. It 
also shows that the Senators and Representatives from the fourth, 
fifth and sixth representative districts, who were declared elected by 
the same order, were in fact defeated on the vote actually cast, by 
majorities ranging from three hundred to eleven hundred votes. It 
shows that this defeat of the popular vote was brought about by va¬ 
rious fraudulent and corrupt means, among which the chief were 
the destruction of the Republican ballots; the marking of the bal¬ 
lots as “white” and “colored’’ under an order from Geneal Hancock, 
procured by Democratic influence. 

The fraudulent addition of marks to the names of Democratic can¬ 
didates on the tally lists, at midnight, after the count of the ballots 
had been finished ; the abstraction from the tables of piles of bal¬ 
lots marked colored ; the fraudulent refusal or neglect to count all 
the ballots cast (the recount in Judge Leaumont’s case shows that 
seven hundred and twenty-seven (721) were there, but not counted); 
the substitution of Democratic ballots for Republican ballots by the 
commissioners and others. 


*0 

-A 

% 

<r> 


MIL; 


.(• ■ 

t r ■ ■ 





The change effected by the above specified frauds alone, makes a 
change of over eighteen hundred (1800) votes against the Republi¬ 
can candidates, which were legally cast in their favor. 

The total number of votes of which the Republican candidates 
were defrauded, including voters intimidated, and voters illegally 
rejected was two thousand nine hundred and fifty-seven (2951). 

The testimony will show the amount of frauds in the other par¬ 
ishes. 

A careful election law guarding vigorously against frauds, and 
especially protecting voters against intimidation, is essential to a 
free and fair election in this State. 

All of which is respectfully submitted. 

HUGH J. CAMPBELL, 

P. HARPER, 

WM. MURRELL, 

EDW. S. WIMON. 


PARISH OE ASCENSION. 

Election of April 17 and 18, 1868. 

Frederick Fob'b, a resident of Assension parish states on oath: 
That the number of Republioan votes fraudulently thrown out in 
that parish was two hundred and fifty-one (251). The number of 
Democratic votes fraudulently cast, two hundred (200). 

Thomas Suffle, a resident of Ascension parish states on oath : 
That Joseph Gonzales, Sheriff of that parish, substituted one 
hundred and forty-five Democratic tickets for a like number of 
Republican tickets. 


PARISH OE BOSSIER. 

Election of April 17 and 18, 18G8. 

Lewis Simmons, states on oath that he is a resident and qualified 
voter in the town of Fillmore in this parish, on the seventeenth 
and eighteenth of April last he went to Eillmore; at the polls 
he saw a man named George Simpson go up to vote, with 
his registration papers and a Republican ticket in his hand, 




5 


wiiei’i a white man drew a pistol, and told him that he would 
let him know that the town belonged to them and not to the 
niggers, also saying “if you cannot vote with us,’* meaning the 
Democrats, “you shall not vote at all, and if you do no leave 
I will shoot you.’’ Witness than left for home, not voting at 
all; after the voting was over, witness.saw the ballot box open, and 
saw two white men take Republican tickets from said box and throw 
them on the floor and substitute Democratic, which they wrote upon 
and put into the box. Witness was standing only five or six feet 
from them when this was done. 


PARSII OF BIENVILLE. 

W. H. Honneus, being duly sworn, deposes and says: That he 
lives in Bienville parish; that on the seventeenth day of April, 18G8, 
he went to the polls at Mount Lebanon, in said parish, as supervisor 
under authority of the Board of Registration, of which S. B. Pack¬ 
ard is chairman. Says, on the evening of the sixteenth, the citizens 
of the town held a meeting on my account to see what should be 
done with me. 

On the next morning—the day of the election—Dr. Coustruay, a 
citizen of the town, called upon me, and told me that he was re¬ 
quested by the citizens to inform me “ that I must leave town for my 
own safety.” I asked him what would be the consequence. if I did 
not leave town ; he said my life would be in danger. I then told 
him that I was here on official business, under author! ty of the con¬ 
stitutional board of registration, and that I should stay there. He 
then told me if that was the case he would go over and send Dr. 
Eagan, who was running for the State Senate. Dr. Eagan then came 
to me and asked if I was appointed supervisor of election. I told 
him I was. He then said he would give me protection (if he was 
able to give it), but that the people were determined that I shouldnot 
stay in town. I distributed tickets to the freedmen until about ten 
o’clock, when a freedman who voted the Radical ticket was asked by 
his former master why he voted that ticket; the man replied that he 
was free, and supposed he had a right to vote as he pleased. Ilis 
former master knocked him down; a colored man stepped up to inter¬ 
fere; then four or five of the citizens came up and interfered, and 





did arrest Urn colored maw, and the Sheriff put them tt.hda? arrest, 
and did arrest about twenty colored men in town* but did not disarm 
any white men. Then the same white man made a move over towards 
me, as I believe with the intention to shoot me. They then com- 
menced driving all the colored men from town, and allowing no more 
to come in to vote. They did not allow a colored man who had been 
appointed commissioner, to serve, but drove him off. 

I saw, then, from the appearance of the mob, that my life was not 
safe, and I left and went to Sparta. I am certain that at least one 
hundred Republican voters were driven away, and not allowed to 
vote; and I am also satisfied that in the parish there w T ere at least 
three hundred legal voters, known to he Republicans, who were not 
allowed to vote at all. 


Board of Supervisors, Bienville Parish, 

April 25,1868. 

c 

S. B. Packard, Chairman Board of Kegisters: ' 

We have the honor to transmit the following report: 

It is not within the knoweldge of the Board of Supervisors if any 
person has applied for registration and been improperly refused. 
The following named persons are registered in the opinion of this 
board contrary to the intent of the Reconstruction acts: 

J. R. Head, Sparta—Sheriff before the war; member of the rebel 
Legislature during the war. 

Hampton Bradley, Sparta—Justice of the Peace before the war; 
tax collector during the war. 

W. C. Mayo and Moses Tullis, Sparta; J. B. Booth and D. K. 
Thomas, Ringold—Justices of the Peace before the war. 

Threats of all kinds and character, from the mildest disapproval to 
that of death, were made against colored men in case they should 
vote the Republican ticket. 

Since the election they have been turned out of employment, 
beaten, and in one case, shot—proving that they w T ere no empty 
threats. It is almost an impossibility to get accurate knowledge of 
the wrongs committed from the danger attending any attempt at 
reporting them. If an ex-Federal officer-armed with his commis¬ 
sion as Supervisor of Election—could only stay in town one-half a 




1 


day, it may not seem strange that the poor freedman can neither 
report or vote as he would. The Deputy Supervisors of Brush 
Valley report the election quiet and undisturbed at that precinct. 
From the Deputy at Arcadia we have received no report, but from 
the election returns we learn that, of the one hundred and seventy- 
nine colored voters in that precinct, only seventy-four voted, one- 
third of them voting against the constitution. 

One of the Board of Supervisors intended staying in Mount Leb¬ 
anon during the election. Upon presenting his commission as su¬ 
pervisor he was promised protection by some of the better citizens, 
but, despite their protecting influence, he was run out of the town, 
with the election but one-fourth over. He saw, before he left, a 
colored man knocked down for voting the Republican ticket, by a 
white man, who immediately drew his revolver, and was prevented 
from further mischief only by interference of his friends. The 
colored man was promptly arrested by the Sheriff; the white man 
with his revolver was unmolested. 

It is the belief of the Supervisors of Mount Lebanon that all of 
the votes polled for the constitution at that precinct were polled 
before he left the town, early on Friday. It is emphatically the 
opinion of this board that it was by threats, violence and fraud, and 
that only, which could have kept a third of the colored voters of 

i 

these two precincts from the polls, which ft cannot need our opinion 
to satisfy any one that of the colored votes cast, more than one-third 
of them would not have been thrown against their own best in¬ 
terest—against their dearest rights as'men—except under influences 
the most improper. 

Of the fifteen commissioners, twelve were openly opposed to the 
Constitution, to reconstruction upon the Congressional plan, and 
negro suffrage in any form; no colored commissioners served upon 
anyof the boards; two were appointed; one by threats was prevented 
from serving; the other did not serve, because white men would not 
serve with him. Ballots were placed in the commissioners’ hands, 
giving them a chance to examine them if they chose ; in one instance 
the commissioners informed the colored man “ that his employers 
would kill him if he voted that ticket,” the Republican ticket. r Again, 
the commissioner wrote upon the back of a ticket “ this is the ticket 
he voted,” gave it to the man telling him to give it to his employers. 
There is a list of names in the Registrar’s office of men who voted 
without having been registered, which we have been unable to get- 


8 


In making arrests and doing their duty, the Sheriffs were ex¬ 
ceedingly prompt when colored men were tho parties. Colored men 
who came to the polls armed were promptly disarmed, but in no 
case has it come to the knowledge of the board that a white man 
was either arrested or disarmed. 

The general conducting of the election was such as to intimidate 
or discourage all friends of reconstruction ; as an expression of the 
opinion of the voters upon the subjects submitted to them, it w r as 
the most perfect farce imaginable. # 

(Sighed) M. H. TWITCHELL, 

W. IT. HONNEUS, 

E. W. DEWEES. 


New Orleans, La , June 20, 1868. 

Hon. S. P. Packard, Chairman Board of Registration, New Orleans, La. 

Sir —At the earnest solicitation of Mr. E. W. Dewees, the Republi¬ 
can candidate for Representative from Bienville, I have the honor to 
make the following statement for the information of all parties 
interested. 

At the recent election for the ratification of the State Constitution 
at Bienville, a board of registers was appointed by you to supervise 
the election, and in that,’ consisting of M. H. Twitchell, W. H. 
Honneus, and E. W. Dewees, to whom I rendered such facilities for 
their accommodations as were at my command. Having made the 
necessary arrangements preparatory to the election, and tho fore¬ 
going gentlemen taken their stations at their respective places, Mr. 
Honneus, one of the board, came to me on the evening of the election 
day and stated that he had been forcibly driven away from the polls 
at Mount Lebanon, and not allowed to stay there. I stated the 
circumstances to the sheriff, and remonstrated with him on the 
subject of keeping the peace in that parish. He informed me that tho 
aggressors should be turned over to the civil authority to be dealt * 
with according to law ; I offered this assurance to Mr. Honneus, 
asking for his statement in writing, but he declined, saying that no 
justice could be had under the circumstance from the civil authori¬ 
ties, and concluded to repair to his home as he was then threatened 
(as I afterwards learned), with similar treatment at Sparta. I have 




\ 



r* 

9 

made diligent inquiries as lo the Republican sentiments of tkti 
voters in that precinct, and I am fully satisfied, that if they had not 
been intimidated, or your supervisor driven away, that that poll 
would at least have returned a Republican majority. 

I have also to state that Mr. A. N. Jones, chairman of the board 
of commissioners'of elections under military appointment at Arcadia 
informed me after bringing in the election return of that ward, that 
colored voters were threatened and roughly handled at the poll, and 
that from personal observations of both him and his brother, who was 
on the outside, that it was not safe for any white man to vote the 
Republican ticket. I asked for his written statement to that effect, 
with a view to invalidate the election in that precinct, but he replied, 
and very reasonably too, that if the election there was disputed, and 
his name to be mentioned in connection with it, that his life would 
not be secure. 

In conclusion, I would state that there was no military there to 
give tone and independence to the free exercise of the ballot box. 
Undue influence may have been made to coerce many from their duty 
as Republicans contrary to their wishes ; an attempt had been made 
to assassinate myself the clay after the election, while in the peaceful 
discharge of my duties, without the least cause or provocation fo rso 
outrageous an act; and I am fully convinced from personal acquaint¬ 
ance, and from what has transpired since in the parish, that Repub¬ 
licanism and every other manly and independent feeling is suppress¬ 
ed by the populace which is not in accordance with their wishes. 
(Signed) WM. H. FINEGfAN. 


PARISH OF CADDO. 

The following copy of a communication from the Hon. Chas. W. 
Lowell, late chairman of the Board of Registrars in this parish, to 
to the Secretary of Civil Affairs, Fifth Military District, is a fair 
commentary on the conduct of the late election in this parish: 

Office Board of Registears, Parish of Caddo, 
Shreveport, La, April 24, 1868. 

Secretary of Civil Affairs, Fifth Military District: 

g IR _j desire to call your attention to the manner in which the 

election of the seventeenth and eighteenth instant, was carried on in 

2 



>3GinG of the products, iu this parish, remote from this point and at 
which neither of the registrars could be present. 

This report is based upon complaints made to me since the elec¬ 
tion by electors; which complaints I took in writing and upon the 


oath of the complainants. From these statements I find the follow¬ 
ing state of things at ward No. 2, poll at Greenwood; the commis¬ 
sioners of election refused to receive the votes of freedmen, who had 
registered at Shreveport, although they lived in ward No. 2, when 
they registered and ever since, without investigating the facts any 
further than to ask them where they registered, while one man, 
■white, who lives in Shreveport, and registered in ward No. 4, never 
having lived in ward No. 2, but happening to be in Greenwood on 
the day of the election, was allowed to vote. 

About forty (40) of the former class, i. e., freedmen who regis_ 
tored at Shreveport, but whose certificates showed that they lived in 
ward No. 2, and whose names were on the poll books of said ward 
No. 2, came to my office on the evening of April 18, and made com¬ 
plaint that they were refused the right to vote, at the poll in said 
ward No. 2; others came the next day and every day since. 

Other complaints have been made to me by voters, living in that 
ward, that they were compelled, by armed men, under threats of 
being killed, to go to the polls and vote contrary to their wishes. 

Again, the commissioners allowed a band of armed men to stand 
near the polls, who deterred voters from casting ballots except as 
they dictated, actually taking in some instances the ballots offered 
by voters and tearing them in pieces, in view of the commissioners 
and the voter, warning the voter to leave unless he deposited a bal¬ 
lot to their liking, and the commissioners made no attempt to stop 
such proceedings. 

One instance is reported to mo where a man, who registered in 
Texas last fall, presented his certificate to vote, and the commission¬ 
ers informed him that they would give him a new certificate for Lou¬ 
isiana, and allow him to vote if lie would vote as directed. 

Again, the commissioners at this poll allowed intoxicating liquor 
to be sold and drank freely near their polls, under the influence of 
which men with pistols in their hands, employed themselves in in¬ 
timidating and threatening voters, and forcing many to vote con 
trary to their wishes, and others to leave without voting at all. 

In addition to the above facts, the men who acted as commission- 


11 


crs were not legally qualified, as appears by their oaths returned 
to me. 

They were appointed on the fifteenth day of April, A. I). 1808, by 
Fred. A. Fuller and Robert T. Dunham, two members of the Board 
of Registrars. The oaths which they returned to me were sub¬ 
scribed and sworn to on the thirteenth April, two days before they 
were appointed, and the oath was administered by Ross Wilkinson, 
as Registrar, who was not a member of the board, on the thirteenth; 
on the sixth of April Mr. Wilkinson tendered his resignation as a 
member of this board; on the ninth of April he left the office entirely, 
and went into the country, canvassing politically—he being a candi¬ 
date for Congress—and on said ninth day of April, Mr. Fuller and 
v \ 

myself, and the other members of the board, appointed Mr. Thomas 
F. Monroe a member of the board, and he immediately qualified and 
entered upon the discharge of his duties, and we at once notified 
your office. This was done in compliance with the provisions of 
paragraph III. of special orders No. 55, extract 3, from your head¬ 
quarters, dated March IT, 18G8. 

Mr. Wilkinson remained off the “board’’ from that date; therefore^ 
as these commissioners were not legally qualified, and neglected to 
carry out the instructions under which commissioners were 1o act, 
and so flagrantly violated their orders and instructions, I would re¬ 
spectfully recommend that the vote of that ward be thrown out 
entirely and not counted. I also call attention to the affidavits of 
Thomas Henderson and William Steward, registered voters, in the 
fifth ward, or Summer Grove precinct, which affidavits were sup¬ 
ported by the statements of several other voters from that precinct, 
made to me verbally. 

A number of men in that ward, not under contract, have been dis¬ 
charged because they declined to vote as their employer wished; some 
of them did not vote at all. Non-voting by the freedmen seems to 
be as great an offense in the eyes of these people, as voting contrary 

to their wishes. 

From what I have learned from the fifth ward, I am satisfied that 
a large number of freedmen were forced to vote contrary to their 
wishes, and many were compelled to leave the polls without voting 
at all; and I make the same recommendation in regard to this poll, 
as I have in regard to ward number two. 

I am also compelled to make report of the conduct of the sheriff 
on election days, at Shreveport. He had Something like fifty men, 


12 


selected as special deputies, all wearing badges and armed with re¬ 
volvers. The sheriff was a candidate for re-election, and many of 
these deputies spent their whole time in electioneering and obtain¬ 
ing votes for their chief. 

The ferry across the river at Shreveport Vv as stopped on the days 
of election, by the sheriff’s order, as I have since learned, and a 
flat boat substituted, with instructions to cross wdiite men, l^ut no 
colored men • and all the skiffs in the river were tied up by the 
same authority ; so that many freedmen who could reach Shreve¬ 
port only by that route, were unable to get to the polls, while white 
men came by that route without obstruction. Men wearing the 
same badge were also out on the roads leading to town, stopping 
freedmen coming into the city, unless they had a conservative card. 

Respectfully yours, &c., 

(Signed) CHAS. W. LOWELL, 

Chairman Board of Registrars Parish of Caddo. 


The following report of the number of votes cast in this parish 
will tend to show the result of the intimidation used: 

Office Boaed of Registeaes, Caddo Paeish, 
Shreveport, Louisiana, April 23, 1868. 

I certify that the following is a correct statement of the number of 
registered voters in this parish, white and black. Also, the number 
of registered voters, white and colored, that voted at the election 
held on the seventeenth and eighteenth instant: 


Number of registered voters, (colored). 3252 

Number of registered voters, (white). 1222 

Total... 4474 

Number of votes cast, (colored) ... 1730 

Number of votes cast, (white). 1050 

Total. 2780 

Number of colored voters not voting. 1522 

Number of white voters not voting. 172 

Total. 1694 


(Signed) CHARLES W. LOWELL, 

Chairman Board of Registrars, Caddo parish, 



















PARISH DE SOTO. 


George Washington states on oath that on the morning of the 
seventeenth of April 1808, he went to the town of Mansfield, Louisi¬ 
ana, for the purpose of voting; when he arrived at the court house he 
saw a large crowd of white men assembled in the court house square* 
They were around the freedmen; he saw some of them take the freed- 
men's tickets away from them by force; other freedmen had given their 
tickets up on account of threats and violence, and other tickets were 
given to these freedmen. A line was drawn on the*ground near the 
window of the Sheriff’s office through which the ballots were depos. 
ited, which was called a dead line, and no freedmen were allowed to 
pass that line except those who had been compelled to vote the 
Democratic ticket, and against the constitution. 

When witness made an attempt to get to the window, he and other 
freedmen were pushed back by the crowd of white men, who sur¬ 
rounded the window. They were also ordered by Mr. Donaldson, the 
sheriff, to get back, who at the same time flourished a large hickory 
club, which he had in his hand, saying that he was the commander 
of this election. When witness found it impossible to get a chance 
to vote as he wished, he with some of the other freedmen sought 
Mr. S. J. Hill, the chairman of the board of registrars, to make a 
complaint to him of how matters were; that the freedmen could not 
have free access to the polls. They found Mr. Hill in the court 
house, and upon making the complaint to him he appeared to treat 
it with indifference, and called some white people, who came to where 
they were standing. A crowd began to assemble around, and wit¬ 
ness and other freedmen then left, fearing that they might get into 
some difficulty. Witness went to the court house three times that 
day and attempted to vote, but was prevented as he had been in the 
morning. To the best of his belief there were about three hundred 
(300) who were prevented from voting that day. 

He went to said poll on the morning following (eighteenth), ex¬ 
pecting that the election would be fairly conducted, having seen the 
evening previous a detachment of United States cavalry arrive in 
Mansfield. 

When ho arrived in the town he saw one of the soldiers with a 
a handful of Democratic tickets, followed by a white man (a resi- 
xLent of Mansfield), who also had a handful of said tickets. The 


14 


♦ 


soldier was issuing the tickets which he had to the freedmen, telling 
them that it was better for them to vote for their old masters; he 
also took the tickets which they had away from them and tore them 
up. Witness followed this soldier and saw that he continued issuing 
these tickets, until he had supplied nearly every freedman in town— 
which, to the best of -his belief, was about two hundred. On another 
street he saw another soldier (in company with some white men of 
bad character) advising the freedmen to vote for their old masters. 
Witness knows from the confidence which the freedmen have in the 
United States soldiers that a great many voted against the constitu¬ 
tion, not being aware that they had been deceived. Witness further 
states that the election was more unfairly conducted on the 
eighteenth than on the seventeenth. More frauds were then com- 
mitted, as the white men were emboldened by the actions of the 
soldiers, upon whose arrival in town he and all the other freedmen 
felt encouraged—believing that they would be permitted to vote 
freely. About two or three hundred freedmen besides himself re¬ 
turned and went to the court house, but were ordered away by the 
officer in command of the cavalry, who said that if they (the freed¬ 
men) did not leave town and go back to the plantations immediately, 
he would order his men to make them leave. 

From witness’ own feelings and what he saw afterward, the 
officer’s conduct and the deception used by his men, had a very 
demoralizing effect upon the freedmen. 


State Jones and Sane Robinson state on oath that they are loyal 
voters of the parish of De Soto ; that to their own knowledge there 
were as many as forty-five (45) colored voters who voted for the 
constitution at the precinct known as “ Slawson’s Box,’’ in ward five; 
and their reason for making this declaration is, that they saw that 
number vote the Republican ticket, and that they all received their 
tickets from the same man, and therefore positively affirm that said 
number of Republican tickets were cast at said precinct. Depo¬ 
nents further state that they saw the commissioners of election sub¬ 
stituting other tickets for those aforesaid. 

Nat Winters, being duly sworn, deposes and says: That on the 
morning of the seventeenth of April, 1868, he went to the court house 
in the town of Mansfield, La., for the purpose of voting. He saw 



there a large crowd of white men assembled around the window of 
the Sheriff’s office, in which place the commissioners of election were 
receiving the votes; that, whenever a colored voter would go up to 
the said window for the purpose of depositing his ballot, these white 
men would take hold of him and pull him away from the window, 
and by threats compel him to show his ticket; if it was a Republican 
ticket, they would snatch it from him, and tell him he was not voing 
the right ticket, and would give him one in the place of the one 
taken from him, thereby leading tho colored voters to believe that 
they were voting for tho constitution, when they were actually voting 
against it. The Democrats had tickets printed on the same colored 
(blue) paper that the Republicans had, in order to deceive the col¬ 
ored voters—and they, not being able to read, -were easily misled. 


PARISH OF EAST FELICIANA. 

> 

Your Committee have the honor to call your attention to the 
proceedings of a meeting of the merchants and planters of East 
Feliciana held at Clinton on the eighth of October, 1868, at which 
the following resolutions were passed: 

Resolved, That we will not employ for the future any freedman 
who shall hereafter vote the Radical ticket, nor will we rent lands, 
advance supplies, or assist in any manner any such persons. A 
certificate from the employers will be necessary to show that any 
freedman has voted the Democratic ticket, or has not voted at all. 
We will always give our preference to those who voted the Demo¬ 
cratic ticket and are members of tho Democratic club. 

Resolved, That we will not patronize any professional man, or 
trade with any merchants who do not bind themselves to be gov¬ 
erned by the above regulations. 


PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE. 

Georgo W. Ragan, states on oath, that he is a resident of the city 
of Baton Rouge, that he was a supervisor of election in the above 
parish at the election held on the seventeenth and eighteenth days 
of April, 18G8; that he was also a candidate for State Senator on the 




10 


Republican ticket at said election; that lie was frequently present at 
the polls in precincts one and two during both days of the election; 
that the menacing threats made by white men armed with clubs, and 
claiming to act under authority from the Sheriff or Mayor of the 
city, and also the fact that he was apprised by many of his friends 
that an assault was contemplated on him by certain, members of the 
Democratic party, caused him to fear that his life was in danger, Vmd 
that an attack on him might result in a general riot ; he attempted 
several times to vote, but each time was surrounded by special 
policemen, who would remark, “ that they only wanted a chance at 
him,” “ that they would watch him,” etc., accompanied by actions 
that convinced him that his own safety and the peace of the com¬ 
munity required that he should not forcibly attempt to vote, and con¬ 
sequently he did not vote at all. 

About two weeks previous to the election, witness stepped into a 
beer saloon for the purpose of taking a glass of beer, when a man 
named Garick and eight or ten others made an attack on him and 
attempted to throw him out of the door, saying, “ that he had 
helped to make that damned black nigger constitution, and expected 
to carry it over the heads of gentlemen, but that it would carry him 
to hell, and damn soon too.” The proprietor failed to give him any 
protection, although he called upon him for it, but on the contrary 
told him to leave, and as he was passing out he was severely beaten 
with canes and clubs. Some of the parties were arrested, but on 
the trial the very men who were present at the time of tho assault, 
said they heard nothing, saw nothing, and knew nothing of the 
matter. 

S. Wrotnowski states on oath, that nearly all the Democratic can¬ 
didates for offices hi this parish were disfranchised by the acts of 
Congress. Among this number was B. F. Bryan, candidate for clerk 
of the District Court. Said Bryan was clerk of said court in 1859, 
and Mayor of the city of Baton Rouge under the Confederate Gov¬ 
ernment in 1862. After the occupation of that city by the Federal 
troops, he was arrested by order of General Benj. F. Butler, took the 
oath of allegiance to the United States Government, was released, 
and shortly after passed through the lines, enlisted in the Confeder¬ 
ate cavalry, and served as a soldier in the same until the final sur¬ 
render of the Confederate General Dick Taylor. 


That the offices of the justices of the peace in the city were closed 
during* the days of the election, and consequently voters who had 
lost their certificates of registration could not make affidavits, and 
were therefore deprived of voting. 

That two members of the Board of Registrars were disfranchised 
by the acts of Congress. 

That G. W. Husted, chairman of said board was also a candidate 
on the Democratic ticket for parish judge. 

That said board of registrars did issue an order the day before 
the election that four ballot boxes should be used at each poll, so as 
to cause voters to use different ballots for State, ward and munici¬ 
pal officers. 

That the Republican tickets were printed with the names of all 
the candidates on one ticket, as it was not understood that any such 
mode was to be adopted. 

That this made it necessary to cut the tickets in two or three 
pieces, which many colored men, not understanding, were at a loss 
how to proceed. 

That the commissioners of election would give the colored men no 
instructions or advice, neither would they allow others to do so, and 
the consequence was many tickets were, according to said commis¬ 
sioners’ decision, deposited in the wrong box and rejected in the 
courts. 

Whereas, the Democrats of the parish were advised of this matter, 
and received instructions from the register and commissioners of 
election, and therefore lost no ballots for their candidates or 
“ against the constitution.” 

That the registration list showed about throe thousand colored 
voters and about fourteen hundred and twenty white; and although 
it is an undoubted fact that most of the colored voters voted or 
desired to vote the Republican ticket, and that some few whites at 
least did the same ; the returns showed the astonishing table of 
two thousand one hundred and eleven votes against the Consti¬ 
tution, and only one thousand three hundred and fifty-one for it. 

W. H. Benton, a candidate for parish judge on the Republican 
ticket in the parish of East or West Baton Rouge, states on oath 
that he was a supervisor of elections at Redwood precinct in said 
parish on the seventeenth and eighteenth days of April, 18G8; that 
on his arrival at said precinct he was insulted by one P. F. Connelly, 
3 


Who ordered .him 10 leave the polls, and said il he i’emaiueci lie (don- 
nelly) would kill him before night, At this, the deponent applied to 
the commissioners of election for protection* Mr. McHugh, one of 
them, called to the deputy sheriff and told him to try and preserve 
order. Witness told the commissioners that he was not there to 


electioneer, but simply to see that a free and fair expression of the 
people was allowed at that poll. ^ 

About ten A. M., April 17, Mr. Harrigan and Peter Jones arrived 
at this poll with Eepublican tickets, and asked witness how the Re¬ 
publican ticket was running. He informed them that all the officers 
conducting the election at that poll were opposed to the Republican 
ticket, and that the intimidations had been so great that many of 
the Republicans refrained from voting, believing it dangerous to 
attempt it. 

Mr. Harrigan, in order to test this matter, gave some seven men 
Republican tickets, who proceeded with him to the poll for the pur¬ 
pose of voting. When the first man handed in his ticket, Mr. Har- 
rigan accused Commissioner Noble of changing it, and asked him 
not to change the man’s ticket. Whereupon said Harrigan was 
assaulted, struck and kicked, and Commissioner Noble encouraged 
this conduct, by going to the door and saying very energetically— 
“ damn him give it to him—run him off the ground.” Mr. McHugh 
likewise indorsed these proceedings by saying “ he could whip Har¬ 
rigan himself, then and there, and would like to do it.’’ Some one 
in the crowd remarked to him that “there were plenty of his friends 
there to do the fighting.” 

Ned Johnson, colored, handed to the commissioner a Republican 
ticket. A man stepped up and asked him if Benton gave him that 
ticket. He said no—a colored man by the name of Jones gave it to 
him, and told him it was the right ticket for him to vote, and that 
he wished to vote it. Said man told Johnson that he was voting 
himself out of house and home; that lie believed Benton had given 
him the ticket, and, shaking a switch in Benton’s face said to John¬ 
son, “ if you follow such a man as this he will lead you and your 
whole race to liell,” whereupon several others made insulting 
remarks about witness, such as “he ain’t worth a dog’s notice,” 
“ lie’ll find this place too hot to hold him,” “what business has lie 
here,” “ such fellows must be attended to immediately,” and remarks 
of like character. Soon after several of witness’ friends came and 


19 


begged him to leave or lie would be killed before night. Said tdiey 
had heard his life threatened in a house near by by men who were 
drinking whiskey freely, and they thought it very dangerous for him 
to remain longer. 

About this time ten or fifteen colored men came and said it was 
impossible for them to vote as they desired, and therefore they bad 
made up their minds not to vote at all; that they desired to vote the 
Republican ticket, and could not do so. 

Commissioner McHugh admitted to witness that he was a justice 
of the peace for twenty-five years before the war, and had, willingly, 
aided the Confederate government by furnishing supplies and 
drilling the men; and, common report says, he held the office of 
justice of the peace under the Confederate government. 

Commissioner McHugh was a candidate for justice of the peace 
on the Democratic ticket. 

Commissioner Knox said, in the hearing of witness, that he was 
a justice of the peace before the war, and a Confederate soldier 
during the war. 

At Ihe courthouse precinct, witness was informed by many col¬ 
ored men that they wished to vote the Republican ticket, but that 
so much fraud was used they dare not attempt it for fear they would 
lose their votes. Witness then started to make a statement of the 
case to the Commanding General, but was arrested by order of 

Mayor Elam and locked up in prison. 

/ 

Edward D. Triplat, states on oath, that he has lived at Plain’s 
precinct,” in the parish of East Baton Rouge over four years; that 
he is well acquainted with nearly every colored man entitled to vote 
in that precinct, and that he knows of but one who would volunta¬ 
rily have voted the Democratic ticket; that he was present at said 
precinct on the seventeenth and eighteenth days of April, 1898, 
during the election, and while there he heard Charles Sherburne, 
one of the commissioners of election, say that’ lie would discharge 
any of his hands that voted for the constitution ; that he did not see 
one of them vote, and does not think they did ; that many colored 
men were much intimidated by their Democratic employers, as they 
feared to vote the Republican ticket, lest they should be discharged, 
and they and their families suffer in consequence ; that several of 
them stated this to be.a fact, and that probably not less than one 
hundred failed to vote at this precinct alone on this account ; that 


20 


some colored men were discharged for even registering ; that the 
commissioners of election at Plain’s precinct were all opposed to re¬ 
construction ; that the deputy sheriff arrested colored men for car¬ 
rying arms about their persons, but would not arrest white men for 
the same offense, even when said white men were pointed out to 
him ; that deponent is acquainted with W. H. Benton, and knows 
him to be an honest and upright man in all his dealings, and a man 
of undoubted truth and veracity. 

Henry Ferguson states, under oath, that he has been intimately 
acquainted with Mr. W. H. Benton since 1862, during part of which 
time he has been in the employment of said Benton. He has always 
known him to be a man of undoubted truth and veractity, perfectly, 
upright in all his dealings, and in many instances found him to be 
an exception in that particular. From his intimate acquaintance 
with Mr. Benton, during this time, he knows that he would not make 
a statement under oath that was not strictly true in every particu¬ 
lar—even to subserve his own interests, however great. 

The following is a complete and comprehensive summary of the 
rebutting testimony in regard to the conduct of the late election in 
the Parish of East Baton Bouge : 

Wilmot H. Goodale, testilics, that he was present at and about 
the polls, in the city of Baton Rouge frequently during the election 
on the seventeenth and eighteenth days of April, I 860 . 

The election seemed to be conducted in a quiet and orderly 
manner. Witness heard no threats used and saw nothing that 
looked like intimidation or violence, he saw no armed men, at the 
polls or about the streets, except a few policemen with tiie ordinary 
club. Members of both political parties were allowed free access, 
to the rooms while the votes were being counted, in order to satisfy 
themselves that the proceedings were conducted in a fair and legal 
manner. During a five years residence he has ever found the peo¬ 
ple as quiet and law abiding as in any community t in which he has 
ever lived. 

Members of the Republican party were present at the polls by 
consent of both parties for the purpose of observing the manner in 
which the election was conducted. 

Witness heard no complaints made by these persons as to the 
manner in which said election was conducted ; on the contrary, he 
heard several express their satisfaction. The barrooms and drink-* 
ing houses were closed during both days of elect ion, 


21 


About forty negroes, headed by a white man, (said to be named 
Benton,) marched down the street in a boisterous manner, which 
created apprehension in the minds of the people that some distur¬ 
bance might occur. Very soon a body of Federal troops arrived, 
and the men were stationed at the markethouse, but there was no 
occasion for their services. 

v 


Witness states that he is not, nor would he be acquainted with 
Messrs. Wrotnowski, Regan and Benton ; but from their general 
reputation would not believe them under oath. 

Capt, G. M. Husted states that he was appointed chairman of the 
board of registrars by General Sheridan and acted as such through¬ 
out. the registration. John A. McHugh and Henry A. Knox were re¬ 
fused registration, they were considered disfranchised uuder the re¬ 
construction laws of Congress—this was in 18G7. These men made 
an appeal to General Sheridan, who did not reverse the decision of . 
the board. Witness was again appointed chairman of the board in 
March 1808, by General Hancock; at this time the above named men 
were allowed to register. Witness had nothing to do with the ap¬ 
pointment of commissioners; the test oath was taken by all of them. 

Witness telegraphed Captain Chandler, to know whether he should 
hold a municipal election, as well as State and parochial; this was a 
lew days previous to the election; Captain Chandler asked him if he 
had not received special order No. 55, and added that said order 
called for an election for all officers provided by the “constitution.’’ 
The board immediately issued an order publishing the same in all 
the parish papers, providing for an election of municipal officers, 
stating that separate ballot boxes would be provided for State, niuni- 
ciple and parish officers; both elections were to be held by the same 
commissioners, with jew exception. 

At the time referred to above, when he telegraphed to Captain 
Chandler, he was in possession of the order referred to, but he was 
not aware of the comprehensive nature of the instructions at the 


time. 

Witness further states that he was not aware that the order in¬ 
cluded municipal or parochial elections. Under the instructions 
received from General Hancock, Messrs. McHugh, Knox and Elam, 
were deemed eligible by the board. He cannot say whether the 
board of registration and the commissioners were opposed to or in. 
favor .of reconstruction and the constitution, 


22 


Witness did not deem it important to inquire whether the persons 
appointed as commissioners were, during the late war, opposed to 
or in favor of the Government of the United States. He does not 
know whether or not there were competent persons in Baton Rouge, 
whose position during the war had not been doubtful as regards 
their allegiance to the United States Government. 

Witness was a candidate on the Democratic ticket (against the 
Constitution) for Parish Judge. He was not officially notified of the 
nomination. He did not act as Registrar during the election. At 
the request of the Board he brought the returns of the election to 
New Orleans. 

During the election the arrangements at the polls were such that 
white people were admitted at one door and colored voters at 
another. This was done in order to facilitate the voting. 

Witness thinks there were about one hundred more colored voters 
than white. About fifteen votes were rejected on account of their 
having been deposited in the money box. 

Messrs. Elam and Burr, then occupying the respective positions 
of Mayor and Sheriff were candidates for re-election on the Demo¬ 
cratic ticket. 

B. E. Chaney states under oath that he is a resident of Baton 
Rouge; he was among the first to register in 1867; the Board of 
Registration had then very stringent orders in regard to the regis¬ 
tration of voters. Witness was not rejected at that time, being 
considered duly qualified under the “reconstruction acts of Con¬ 
gress.” 

Witness was present during the late election of April 17 and 18,1868, 
at precincts Nos. 1 and 2 of said parish! he never witnessed an elec¬ 
tion that was conducted more peaceabty, quietly and orderly; 
everything was done to preserve peace and order.. The Mayor 
closed all the bar-rooms at noon, on Thursday, and they remained 
closed until Sunday noon. 

At the request of General Sykes, commanding at Baton Rouge, 
the Mayor appointed a’ special police for the purpose of maintaining 
peace and order. The “special police” were very vigilant in carrying 
out their instructions from the Mayor. 

Every one who was duly qualified, both white and colored, were 
allowed to vote, without let or hindrance, on the presentation of 
their registration certificates. The sheriff did everything in his 


\ 


power to preserve peace and order at the polls, Many colored men 
voted the Democratic ticket openly, and many other did the same 
through the persuasion of theft friends. 

Witness did not see any one prevent Mr. Regan from voting. He 
(Mr. Regan) was electioneering and distributing tickets at the sec¬ 
ond precinct. Witness believes lie could have voted if he saw 
proper. General Sykes, at the request of the Mayor, who antici¬ 
pated trouble, sent a small detachment of Federal troops; they 
were stationed at the market, near the polls at the Court House. 
The presence of the troops proved sufficient to restrain any dis¬ 
turbance. Witness states that he would not believe Messrs. Wrot- 
nowski, Benton or Regan under oath. 

R. H. Day states under oath that ho was frequently at each of the 
wards on both days of the election; he has been for several years ac¬ 
quainted with the people of Baton Rouge, and thinks them remarka¬ 
ble for their peaceful and orderly habits. He did not see any demon¬ 
stration of violence at the polls whatever; by orders of the Mayor 
the bar rooms were closed from Thursday noon until Sunday noon. 
Witness voted at the first ward poll; the colored people appeared to 
be voting freely and as they wished; he saw no one prevent them, or 
use violence or threats; he did not remain long at the polls; he did 
not see Mr. Ryan at the polls, and was not there when the troops ar¬ 
rived. Witness never saw an election more quietly conducted; he 
did not know of the appointment of special deputies or police, and 
did not know that separate doors were assigned to white and color¬ 
ed voters; he was a candidate on the Democratic ticket against the 
constitution. During the war, and after the battle of Baton Rouge, 
witness went into the Confederate lines, and remained there until 
the close of the war. 

S. B. Necham, testifies that he was present at the election held in the 
city of Baton Rouge on the seventeenth and eighteenth days of April, 
1SG8. So far as he knows, the election was conducted in a fair and or¬ 
derly manner. The Republican party had a man stationed at each pre¬ 
cinct, by consent of both parties, for the purpose of guarding against 
fraud or injustice; he heard no dissatisfaction expressed by any of 
these persons. On the second day of the election he saw a crowd of 
colored men headed by a white mail named Benton, going through 
the streets in a noisy manner, this caused many to lie apprehensive 
that some difficulty might occur. 


ii 

A company of federal troops soon arrived and remained near Ihe 
polls until they were closed. 

All men, both white and colored, were allowed to vote as they 
saw fit. 

Many colored men voted the Democratic ticket openly and used 
their influence in favor of that party. 

Witness further states that he is not personalty acquainted with 
Mr. Wrotnowski, (candidate for clerk of the court), Mr. Regan, (can¬ 
didate for the State Senate), nor Mr. W. H. Benton, (candidate for 
parish judge); but from their reputation as to truth and veracity he 
would not believe them under oath. 


PARISH OF FRANKLIN. 

Isaac IT. Crawford states, on oath, that he is a resident of Winns- 
borough, Franklin parish, State of Louisiana, and that he has resided 
there since October, 1858 ; that he opposed secession in 1861, and 
never aided the rebellion, being well known as a Union man during 
the entire war ; that he was informed of the adoption of the four¬ 
teenth constitutional amendment in I860, and advocated and voted 
in 18GT for a State convention, and at the late election was in favor 
of, and voted for the present constitution, and was a candidate on the 
Republican ticket for member of the House of Representatives ; that 
on the 17tli day of April, 1868, early in the morning, he attended 
the election at Redmouth precinct, in Franklin parish, for the pur¬ 
pose of distributing tickets in favor of the constitution and the State 
officers, including Mr. Taliaferro for Governor, and his own name 
for Representative, and for the further purpose of electioneering for 
himself and the constitution. About the time the polls were opened 
two (2) young men arrived with double-barreled shot guns, and 
stationed themselves near and in front of the polls with their guns 
in their hands. This was about half-past eight o’clock A. M. Shortly 
afterwards others arrived with guns, and stationed themselves in a 
like manner. The names of the two young men above referred to 
are Griffin and Amory. They both reside near Redmouth. He 
cannot state, positively, the names of the others who brought guns 
with them. About nine (9) o’clock A. M., about forty (40) colored 
men had arrived at the polls, and as only white men were voting, 



wltJigris requited one of the eemmWdttdrti to oyeii a window 
through which the colored men could vote 5 this the commissioner re* 
luscd to do. The white men were handing their tickets through a 
window, at which the men who had brought guns had stationed 
themselves. As the colored men started toward this poll, as if for 
the purpose of voting, one S. W. Greenwell, who resided near Red- 
mouth, informed them that they could not put their tickets in that 
box; meaning tickets in favor of the constitution Witness heard 
numerous threats of shooting radicals and “them fellows,” as they 
called the white men who were in favor of the constitution, and 
hearing his own name used in the crowd, asked of A. W. Moore, 
sheriff, who was present, what the complaint was against him. 
Moore replied that it was reported that witness had told the negroes 
that ‘'if they voted against the constitution they would vote them¬ 
selves back into slavery.’’ Witness then told Moore that it was a 
false report, and that lie was willing to get up and explain liis po¬ 
sition and ideas of political matters, to those present. Moore re¬ 
plied that he thought I “had better say nothing,” that lie (sheriff 
Moore) “was afraid of a disturbance;’’ that there was near by, coming 
to the election, about one hundred (100) more colored men, and 
that he was very uneasy, and fearful of an interruption. Witness 
seeing lie could do 110 good by remaining longer, being afraid to 
talk to the colored men, or give them tickets, though most of them 
were not supplied, left the polls between ten and eleven (10 and 11) 
o’clock, A. M. About three o’clock, P. M., returned as far as A. 
Gilley’s residence, which was in sight of the place of voting. Mr. A. 
Gilley w r as at home eating his dinner, he informed witness that it 
would not be safe for him (witness) to return to the polls, that there 
was a crowd of men after him, and that they would hurt him, but 
did not know what the crowd intended to do; that witness had bet¬ 
ter get away; that he (Gilley) was a friend to witness and that wit¬ 
ness must not tell that he (Gilley) advised him, for then lie (Gilley) 
would be in danger. Gilley then showed him a back way by which 
lie could escape. Mr. A. Gilley was one of the commissioners of 
election at Redmouth. Witness afterward learned that thirty (30) 
colored men were forced to vote against the constitution, and that 
about one hundred and fifty (150) voters, mostly colored men, were 
prevented by force and intimidation from voting for the constitution, 
at Redmouth. 

4 


26 


After leaving’ Redmouth, witness proceeded to Winnsborougli 
precinct, at which place is the court house. About ten o’clock A. AT., 
eighteenth instant, William B. Adams, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Underwood, 
and others, stationed themselves, armed with sticks and pistols at 
the court house door, where the polls were opened, and immediately 
commenced shouting and hooting. No colored men voted for the 
constitution after these men stationed themselves at the courf: house 
door. Several colored men went up to vote at different times during 
the day, but invariably came away, reporting the men above referred 
to, would not allow them to go to the polls, unless they would vote 
against the constitution. 

About four o’clock P. M., himself and one B. S. Small, on the ad¬ 
vice of Mr. Jourdain, a registrar, advised the colored voters to go 
home, as they did not think they could vote without having a dis¬ 
turbance. The colored men took the advice and went home. About 
six o’clock P. M., the armed men referred to left the court house 
opened. Witness further states that about seventy-live (75) colored 
men, who would have voted for the constitution, at Winnsboro, 
were prevented by fear of violence, on Saturday, the eighteenth day 
of April, 1868, and that one Pinkey Wright, a colored voter of Winns¬ 
boro, informed witness that Asa Hawthorn, who is president of 
the police jury, told him (Wright), on the seventeenth instant, that 
if he voted “ for the constitution/’ he (Wright) would get a load of 
buckshot in his coat before night. Asa Hawthorn brought his gun 
to Winnsboro on the eighteenth, but witness did not see him 
carry it during the day. 

Had it not been for the violence and threats of violence used, the 
Republican ticket would have been elected by a majority of from one 
hundred and fifty (150) to two hundred (200). 

On the nineteenth of April, witness being advised by A. W. Moore, 
sheriff, and other friends, that his life was in danger, especially at 
Redmouth precinct, where there were threats of violence, and that 
he had better for safety leave Franklin parish until the excitement 
had subsided, immediately left his home, and is now stopping in Co¬ 
lumbia, Caldwell parish, where he will remain until troops are sent 
to Franklin parish, or until advised by friends that it is safe for him 
to return. 

Witness further states that it is his firm belief and opinion that 
the lives of all white men, who are known to have voted “ for the 


21 


tlio constitution,” arc in imminent danger in Franklin parish, and 
that it would be an impossibility to contest the late election in 
said parish before the civil authorities, unless troops are sent and 
stationed there in sufficient numbers to give ample protection to the 
law-abiding citizens, and witnesses who might be called upon to give 
evidence; that under the present authorities in Franklin parish but 
lew witnesses could be made to attend, and give evidence of frauds, 
being' afraid of personal violence to themselves. 

At the election only about one-third of the registered colored 
voters of Franklin parish voted; they were all, mostly, anxious to do 
s >, but by threats ol violence and intimidation they were kept from 
the polls. 

In a private letter written by B. S. Small, dated Winnsboro, La., 
April tJ3, 1808, he states that he had been chairman of the Board of 
liegistry there; that every indication had been that the ticket “For 
the Constitution” would be voted almost unanimously; but three or 
four days before the election they began to hear of threats of vio¬ 
lence being made to the freedmen, should they visit the polls, unless 
they would vote the Democratic ticket, and “Against the Constitu¬ 
tion. ’ He says the organization of the Democrats was complete> 
and tactics uniform, and that in order to deter all those who would 
be likely to vote the ticket “For the Constitution” from visiting the 
polls, dark insinuations and open threats were made. In some 
cases, he says, those who went to the polls were hindered from 
voting by the same means, unless they would vote the Democratic 
ticket. At one or two of the precincts everything went on smooth¬ 
ly, but there was a general feeling of insecurity and fear among the 
freedmen ail over the parish. At Itedmouth the demonstrations 
were so violent and. unmistakable that J. H. Crawford, who was 
there on the seventeenth, was advised by one of the commissioners 
to leave in a manner that would be unknown to others, as he thought 
his life to be in great danger. He states that he has the names of 
eight freedmen who were compelled by force to vote “Against the 
Constitution” on the seventeenth instant. Two of the most intelli¬ 
gent of these men, who understood their position wpll, went to 
Winnsboro the next day to sec what could be done about it; they 
stated that over thirty (30) of the forty-six (40) colored voters, who 
cast their votes in the precinct “Against the Constitution/’ were 
forced to do so by threats of violence, such as, “they would fatten 


28 


the buzzards on them,” ‘‘make buzzard’s bait of them,” etc., etc. 

These men were willing to make affidavit to that effect. 

At a Democratic meeting held in Winnsboro, on the Saturday 
previous to the election, one of their number, in a speech, villified 
all who were in favor of the adoption of the constitution; said they 
should be debarred intercourse with their neighbors and refused 
admittance to their houses, etc. At the poll at Winnsboro, f^e says, 
he heard remarks like the following: “Every man who votes the 
damned Radical ticket had better look out;” you vote that damned 
ticket, and it will be the last vote you will ever give;” “if you vote 
that ticket, I wouldn’t be surprised to see you with a load of buck¬ 
shot in your jacket before night.’’ These remarks were coupled with 
gestures and intonations of the voice corresponding to the will to 
carry the threat into effect. 

Charles E. Jordan states, on oath, that he was one of the Board of 
Registrars for the parish of Franklin, in 1867, and also in 1868; that 
there was about one thousand and ninety-five registered vote 's in 
said palish; about six hundred and two of them being colored 
voters; that he was in said parish about a month previous to the late 
elections and remained in said parish until the twenty-fourth of 
April, 1868. 

That he carried the poll book and ballot box to the Redmouth pre¬ 
cinct and delivered them to one of the commissioners, and was 
present on the seventeenth day of April, at said precinct when the 
polls opened, that the commissioners seated themselves around a 
table at an open window (the other window and door of this room * 

being closed), and the voters who voted, handed their ballots or 
tickets to the commissioners. In a short time several other men ar¬ 
rived with guns and pistols and slicks, and stood around and near the 
polls, threatening colored voters. 

One of these men, whose name witness was informed was Bennett, 
having a stick in his hand, there being a stack of guns near by, said, 
in witness’ presence, that “ two damned negroes had voted the 
Radical ticket this morning, and they were the last that should vote 
that ticket; that he had them spotted.” This was said in anexcitable 
voice, and the crowd of white men present approbated it—all being 
in the presence and hearing of several colored voters. After the polls 
had been opened about half an hour or more, the colored voters 
seated themselves under some shade trees near by, having been trying 


29 


to get to the polls to vote, but these men, who were standing near 
the polls with guns in their hands, had prevented them from voting 
when they first presented themselves. That after the colored men 
had seated themselves under the shade, those men who stood around 
the polls with guns, pistols and sticks, would go out to the colored 
men and take them by the arms (in some cases one white man to 


one colored, in others two white men—one on each side—to one 
colored), and march them up to the polls. Said colored men would 
then hand their ballots to the commissioners. The Mr. Bennett who 
made the remark heretofore mentioned, was one of the most active 
in thus marching the colored men to the polls. Between eleven and 
twelve A. M., of said day, witness left the ground, not being able to 
do anything towards having the election properly conducted, and 
being apprehensive of personal danger if he staid or did anything, 
and taking the road leading to Winnsboro precinct, passed several 
colored men, of whom he inquired if they had voted. Some of them 
said they had, but that they were made to vote the Democratic ticket. 
That those white men at the polls, with guns, etc., made them vote 
said ticket, and threatened them with death if they did not, and told 
them they had best vote said ticket, that if they did not they would 
get a load of buckshot in their backs, and used other threats of 
violence. That up to the time witness left Redmoutli precinct, there 
was at least eighty or more colored men on the ground. That there 
are about two hundred and sixty registered voters in Redmoutli 
precinct, about one hundred and fifty of whom are colored men. 

Witness further states that on the eighteenth of April, 18GS, he 
was at Winnsboro precinct; that shortly after the polls were open¬ 
ed, say about nine A. M., some six or eight white men, armed with 
pistols and sticks, took forcible possession of the entrance to said 
polls; two of them were the same who had guarded the polls at Red- 
mouth the day previous, the aforenamed Bennett being one of them; 
that several colored men attempted to get to the polls with Republi¬ 
can tickets, when those white men would take them to one side, or 
stop them, thereby causing most of them to go away without voting 
or even getting to the polls, and these colored men informed witness 
that said white men would not let them go up to the polls unless 
they would vote the Democratic ticket. That there were at Winns¬ 
boro about seventy or more colored voters on said eighteenth 
day of April, 1868 who did not vote, and that they were prevented 


30 


from voting by the white men. That witness was present that day 
when those colored men were furnished with Republican tickets at 
their own request, and saw them go with said tickets to the polls, and 
those white men, armed as aforesaid, turned them back without 
voting. That those white men threatened, in a loud voice, all Radi¬ 
cals and negroes who desired to vote the Radical ticket; that the col¬ 
ored voters, and even the white voters known to be Republicans 
were very much intimidated at said election. 

Witness further states that from his own knowledge, which was 
very extensive in said parish, he having been a registrar in 18(17 and 
1868, and having conversed witli the voters generally on the subject 
of voting at the time the voters were registered, and with a great 
many just before the late election and some soon after the election; 
and that if it had not been for said violence and threats of violence 
in said parish, by white men voting the Democratic ticket, and those 
who were disfranchised and opposed to the ratification of the con¬ 
stitution, that the Republican ticket headed “ For the Constitution” 
would have received at least 150 majority over the Democratic ticket 
headed “Against the Constitution.” That a person's life would have 
been in imminent danger in said parish, (especially colored men), if 
they had given evidence before justices of the peace concerning the 
frauds perpetrated on the days of election. That witness does not 
believe it was or is possible for the civil authorities to act in said par¬ 
ish, or for witnesses to testify to the manner in which the election 
was conducted. That he would have made an official report of this 
violence if the other two registrars would have consented, but that 
they reside in said parish, and gave as a reason for not making an 
official report that their lives would be endangered, although they 
agreed with witness in regard to said violence and fraud. 

The colored men who came to Winnsboro had been assaulted 
before the election, by some of the men who guarded the doors of 
the polls on the eighteenth of April, and that these colored men 
would go out of the way of these white men when they came to town. 

Mr. R. Adams, with a revolver in his hand, chased these colored 
men out of the town, the men running through the registration office. 

Witness further states that it was no uncommon thing for these 
white men to shoot and throw brickbats at the negroes while passing 
in the streets. 


I 


31 

PARISH OF JEFFERSON. 

R. G. Gardner states that during the election of April It and 18, 
18G8, those conducting the election, finding that the Republican 
voters vastly predominated, drove away all such from the polls, thus 
preventing many of them from voting at all ; all sorts of pretexts 
were used to arrest prominent Republicans, in order to destroy their 
influence and intimidate others. The sheriff and his deputies and 
the police, all showed, in this manner, marked hostility to the Re¬ 
publicans ; told them they had no business there ; one of the police 
shot and mortally wounded David Hudson. It was supposed the 
entire police force were Democrats ; but one voted the Republican 
ticket, and it becoming known, his badge was immediately stripped 
off. He was denounced, and on this sole account the city council 
refused to pay him for his services. After the election, it, was cur¬ 
rently reported and generally conceded that he (R. G. Gardner) was 
elected a justice of the peace by a majority of at least four hundred 
votes, but upon counting the ballots the box was found literally 
stuffed with Democratic tickets. 

M. Raymond states that there was a great deal of intimidation by 
men who were appointed as special police by the late sheriff, John 
T. Michel, and the present Mayor of the city of Carrollton. These 
officers would interfere with men while they were voting, and tried 
to prevent them from doing so, because they would not vote the 
Democratic ticket. One of the deputy sheriffs shot and murdered a 
colored man near the polls. • 

Dennis Lee states that he was refused the right to vote on April 
17 and 18, 18G8, on the ground of being too young, although his 
registration papers were correct, and showed him to be of requisite 
age. He procured a witness to prove his age, but the commissioners 
would not hear his testimony. He then demanded his registration 
papers, when lie was arrested, and kept in jail eight days, when he 
was discharged for want of a charge against him. 

Felix J. Leche, being duly sworn deposes and says : 

He was present when Mayor F. Frye was registering voters in 
Carrollton a few days before the election of the seventeenth and 
eighteenth of April last, 18G8. Said Frederic Frye was at the same 
time a candidate for the office of justice of the peace, in the city of 
Jefferson, and while exercising the functions of chairman of the 


* 4 I ’ .* 

board of fetiiBtfation for 
to intimidate colored men and prevent them from registering, using 
an arrogant tone and asking questions to puzzle them, to those who 
had lost their papers or certificates of registration, he, in many cases 
refused to listen to them. Whilst to every white man that came, he 
most willingly gave them papers and would not ask them any ques¬ 
tions whatever; a great many to whom he gave papers wqre not 
even citizens of the parish of Jefferson. At the same time that said 
Frederic Frye was committing all these things, witness remonstrated 
with him for committing such injustices, and was threatened with 
imprisonment for interfering with him. During election days said 
F. Frye vras most actively engaged in electioneering for himself, for 
the office of justice of the peace, and continued to superintend the 
polls; the clerks of the election by him chosen were mostly of a bad 
moral character; they in several instances suffered men to vote 
twice, and did act in a most tyrannical manner towards those known 
to be of republican proclivities, refusing admittance to them, while 
their friends (of democratic proclivities) could at any time gain ad¬ 
mission. The ballot boxes were carried to the houses of the clerks 
of election; witness saw George Pope, Jos. Hafner and the other 
clerks of election, carrying the boxes on the evening of the seven¬ 
teenth and eighteenth of April 1868. Mayor D. C. Woodruff* remon¬ 
strated against their doing so, but to no avail, in consequence of 
which he appointed Mr. John Page (and deponent) to wait upon the 
commanding general (Buchanan), aqd represent to him his appre¬ 
hensions concerning said ballot boxes; this w*as at the close of the 
election on the evening of the eighteenth of April 1868. 

The General referred them to Mayor Keeler, and the Mayor wrote 
to said F. Frye ordering him to proceed immediately and count the 
ballots and not stop counting until finished. 

Witness was himself charged by Mayor Keeler to deliver the said 
order, after making him (witness) take cognizance of its contents. 
Witness delivered said order of Mayor Keeler to Frederick Frye on 
the evening of the eighteenth of April at eleven o’clock, P. M.; the 
said Frye received the order, but did not act upon it. 


the palish of Jcffersoii, did ail in hia powei 


PARISH OF LAFOURCHE. 


D. H. Reese states on oath that lie is a resident of Thibodaux; 

that on the election of April 17 and 18, in direct opposition to orders 

Irom headquarters of the military commander, the commissioner of 

election used two ballot boxes, thus depriving voters of the right to 

vote upon one ticket for all the candidates they had the right to 

select, where, if by any mischance, the piece of ticket was put in 
_ « 

the wrong box, (as in many instances was the case,) it was thrown 
out by the commissioners. 

Many persons were allowed to vote the Democratic ticket who 
were clearly disfranchised; and although, as above stated, many Re¬ 
publican votes were lost, and many Republicans sent from the polls 
by the deputy sheriff, on a charge of being under age, still a larger 
vote was cast than there were legal voters. 

Honorable William Murrell states on oath that he is a resident' of 
the parish of Lafourche; that on April 17 and 18, 18G8, he was at 
the polls at precinct seven of said parish, town of Thibodaux. Many 
of the prominent citizens of said town were at the polls, interfering 
with the election. There seemed to be about fifteen commissioners; 
a deputy sheriff, with a threatening display of pistols, stood at the 
polls receiving tickets, challenging every Republican voter, but not 
saying a word to Democratic voters; the colored voters he sent away 
in squads of fifteen, alleging f hat they were too young. In regard 
to using two boxes for voting—one for State and parish, and one for 
municipal officers, notice was not*given until the night previous to 
the election, thus giving no time for the preparation of the tickets. 
The Republicans lost thereby many votes, as all that were not prop¬ 
erly deposited were thrown out. The returns were otherwise fraud¬ 
ulent, and a gross misrepresentation of the will of the majority. 

Francis Sternburg states on oath that he is a resident of and duly 
qualified voter in the parish of Lafourche; that he was not allowed 
to vote at the late election of April 17 and'18, 1868, although he 
showed an order from the secretary of civil affairs permitting him to 
do so; that many who were clearly disfranchised were allowed to 
vote; that intimidation and threats were freely used by the Demo¬ 
cratic party. Two ballot boxes were used, contrary to orders from 
headquarters, thus confusing Republican voters, who could get no 
explanation or instructions, while Democrats were carefully instruct- 


34 


ed by those conducting the election. Since election by fraud and 
trickery, they have prevented Republican officers elect from qualify¬ 
ing and taking charge of their offices. 


PARISH OF LAFAYETTE. 

Michael Casey, a citizen residing in the parish of Lafayette> states 
on oath that on the tenth of August, 18G8, at the hour of about ten 
o’clock P. M., witness was at Vermilionville. Three colored men in¬ 
formed him that a party of the Ku-Klux Klan had convened at the 
Court House soon after the ringing of the bell, their object being to 
drive away or take witness’ life, if he did not leave the place. Their 
reasons for doing this were, that witness was prominent in the or¬ 
ganization of the Republican party in that parish, and devoted spe¬ 
cial attention to the progress of said party. That since June, 1867, 
the Democrats of said parish have showed their hatred towards him, 
more particularly those who have committed crimes, and whom he 
has tried to bring to justice, and by making the following report to 
the Convention of 1867: “I, Michael Casey, delegate from the par¬ 
ish of Lafayette, do certify that murders and whipping are commit¬ 
ted in this parish; that no person is punished for these outrages; 
that Union men are unable to exercise those rights which the laws 
which the United States have secured to them, unless they are pro¬ 
tected by United States troops, which are greatly needed in this 
parish.” 

James Jefferson states, on oath, that he was at Carron Crow on 
the seventeenth and eighteenth days of April, 1868, and saw colored 
registered voters prevented from voting by the judges of election. 
Deponent saw said voters produce their registration papers ; still 
they were denied the privilege of voting. Deponent further states 
that he saw a whiteman vote at the aforesaid place on the eighteenth 
day of April, 1868, without producing any registration paper—not 
even sworn as to whether he was a registered voter or not. 

Leonard Marchand states on oath that he was at the third ward 
in Vermilion ville, on the eighteenth of April, 1868, and heard one 
of the commissioners of election at said ward say to a white man 
that he should vote. The man said he belonged to the parish of St, 
Martin, and did not come to vote. Said commissioner then com¬ 
pelled the white man to vote, and told him he should vote down the 
constitution and against the Republican candidate. 



85 


Janlaus Cowan states on oath that he was at the fifth ward poll 
during' the election of April 17 and 18, 18G8 ; that he hear 1 Alexan¬ 
der Moore, who was with a party of other white Democrats, about 
fifty in number, say to a colored man that if he voted the Republican 
ticket, he should not remain on the plantation where he was, and 
that if he did not vote the Democratic ticket, lie would be sorry for 
it. All sorts of threats, intimidation and coercive means were used 
to make the colored men vote the Democratic ticket. Many colored 
Republicans, who desired to vote the Republican ticket, were com¬ 
pelled to vote the Democratic ticket. 


PARISH OF OUACHITA. 
Election of April 17 and 18, 18(58. 


Hon. 0. H. Brewster states on oath that he is a resident and reg¬ 
istered voter in this parish. Mr. Butler, commissioner at Forksville, 
feared to open the polls on the second day of election without pro¬ 
tection, and applied to General Headquarters for it, but it was never 
sent; threats and intimidation were freely used against the repub¬ 
licans. 


PARISH OF ORLEANS. • 

Major B. B. Keeler, being duly sworn, deposes and says: 1 was in 
charge of the Bateau of Civil Affairs, under the direction of Gene¬ 
ral R. C. Buchanan. I went on duty in that bureau on the four¬ 
teenth of April. The first instructions I received after entering the 
office was on the morning of the fourteenth. Mr. R. L. Shelly, ac¬ 
companied by two other gentlemen, members of the Republican 
committee, or representing the same on this occasion, represented 
late on that day, to the commanding general, that commissioners of 
election in the parish of Orleans had been appointed by the regis¬ 
trars almost exclusively from the Democratic party, and asked that 
both parties be represented in the Board of Commissioners, by direc¬ 
tion of the commanding general. 

I, that evening, addressed a communication to the chairman of 
each of the twelve boards (right hank included), requiring them 
immediately to answer the following inquiry, in electing commis¬ 
sioners of election: 

Have you appointed representatives from each political party? 




36 


The instructions from the Commanding General, at that time, to me 
were, that if both parties were not represented in said boards, the 
registrars should be directed to cause them to be represented. 

As near as I can remember without reference to the records, the 
inquiry was answered by the chairmen of one-half of the boards) 
that in appointing commissioners of election, both parties had been 
represented in each Board of Commissioners. 

By the chairmen of the other half of the board, the answer was 
made, that no reference had been made to the political views of the 
commissioners of election, but that they had selected men of intel¬ 
ligence and ability. 

The answer to this inquiry was received, during the sixteenth, the 
day preceding the election, too late, as I deemed to instruct the 
chairman last referred to, to make the change asked for by Mr. 
Shelly and directed by the General, as the election commenced at an 
early hour the following morning. 

I am certain the Commanding General was not aware that men of 
either political party in numbers, preponderated in these boards. 

My associations in New Orleans had not made me acquainted with- 
the political view r s of these gentlemen, and with rare exceptions, I 
do not know, at this time, with which political party they had been, 
or are identified. 

During the progress of the election every effort was made, which 
seemed to me practicable to secure fairness in the conduct of the 
election, and every complaint, from whatever source, received every 
possible attention under the circumstances. 

The instructions under which the election was mainly conducted, 
the appointment of registrars, commissioners of election and mode 
of making returns, etc., had been made by General Buchanan, pre¬ 
decessor of General Hancock, in command, as before stated. 

I entered the office of civil affairs, three days before the election, 
a period of time too short, as will be apparent, to suggest, or make 
any general change. These instructions directed the commissioners 
of election to make returns of the election held at their various 
polls to the boards of registrars of the several wards or parishes in 
which their polls were held. 

It was made the duty of the boards of registrars to consolidate the 
returns thus made by the commissioners, and to transmit the same 
consolidated, to the commanding general of the district. 

In the parish of Orleans, on the last day of the election, the regis¬ 
trars were instructed to allow two persons from each of the two 


37 


political parties, and no others, to witness the counting of the 
ballots and making of the returns. Early the subsequent day, the 
nineteenth, it was strongly represented by the chairmen of the 
boards in the parish of Orleans, that it was impossible to complete 
this work without a recess for rest. Nevertheless, the original in¬ 
structions were adhered to and re-affirmed. 

Returns from boards in the parish of Orleans began to come in 
on Tuesday, the twenty-first, and continued to be received for seve¬ 
ral days, the last of them being received, as near as I can remem¬ 
ber, about one week after the election. By the thirtieth of April, I 
think, the returns had been received from all the parishes in the 
State. On account of the extraordinary press of business in my 
office, no examination of them could be made; they were carefully 
filed, and when all were received, the commanding general appointed 
a military board, to consist of members of his staff, namely: Brevet 
Brigadier General L. P. Graham, Brevet Lieutenant Colonel G. W. 
Lieber, Brevet Colonel J. B. Johnson, who were charged with the 
duty of compiling the returns and reporting the result to the com¬ 
manding general. All communications received at that time, re¬ 
lating to the ineligibility, etc., of candidates voted for, were referred 
to the board for consideration in making their report. The returns 
from the forty-eight (48) parishes and various municipalities con¬ 
tained, I should judge, fully six thousand names, as about one 
thousand nine hundred persons were elected, exclusive of municipal 
officers; and for every office there were at least two candidates, and 
in many instances more. 

The names of those who were candidates for municipal offices 
made the number about six thousand; this I learned from subsequent 
examination of the returns. It will be readily seen that the duty 
with which this board was charged involved much labor and patient 
examination. The instructions to the board were, to push the work 
forward without any unnecessary delay, but it was nearly or quite 
one month, or about the first of June, before the board was enabled 
to make its report. As soon as it had done so, the commanding 
general issued his order, announcing the result. 

Question.—Please state if you remember a visit made by Mr. 
Campbell to headquarters, subsequent to the time the returns of 
the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Wards of New Orleans had been sent 
in, and a request from him to be allowed to examine them. 


» 


Answer.-—1 remember distinctly Mr. Campbell’s visit, and showing 
such of the returns as he ashed to see. I do not remember which 
ones these were, but I am of the opinion they were the ones which 
referred to the election of a senator from the district which he now 
represents. 

Question—Do you remember the remark being made, that the fig¬ 
ures on those returns, as regarded Mr. Campbell’s vote, were identi¬ 
cal with those which had just been published in the daily papers V 

Answer—In order that my answer may be perfectly intelligible 
and complete upon the subject embraced by the inquiry, it will be 
necessary for me to preface by saying that one or two days previously 
Mr. Sambola, Mr. Campbell’s competitor, had applied to me for in¬ 
formation as to who had been elected from the Second District of the 
parish of Orleans to the State Senate. The returns, at that time, 
were in possession of the military board referred to. I sent a note 
to the board, repeating Mr. Sambola’s inquiry. Colonel Johnson, of 
the board, came into my office, and told me the returns showed that 
Mr. Sambola had been elected by ninety-seven votes. He made a 
remark, which I did not understand, that a mistake had been made 
in addition of one hundred, which would have elected Mr. Campbell 
by three votes. He further told me that the returns had been cor¬ 
rected, and Mr. Sambola was shown to have been elected, as before 
stated, by ninety-seven votes. The substance of the information 
communicated to me by Colonel Johnson, I stated, I believe, to Mr* 
Campbell at the time. 

Question—State at what time the returns made by the registrars 
of election were submitted to the military board by the commanding 
general. 

Answer—When they were all received. 

Question—State whether a portion of the returns were in your 
possession, prior to their being submitted to the board. 

Answer—All of them were. 

Question—State if you remember having shown any of those 
returns to Mr. Hugh J. Campbell, prior to their being submitted to 
the board. 

Answer—I do; my impression is that I showed such of them as 
he asked to see; I am also of the impression that those he asked to 
see were those made by the registrars of the fourth, fifth and sixth 
wards of the parish of Orleans. 

These referred to (Mr. C’s) election. 


39 

Question—State if you remember whether a copy of those returns 
were published in several of the daily papers of this city about that 
time. 

Answer—I do not know. The result as gathered by newspaper 
reporters, I remember to have seen in the papers, but whether they 
correspond with the returns in my possession, made to headquarters 
I do not know 7 . 

Question—Do you remember Mr. Campbell calling your attention 
to the similarity which existed between the reports as published in 
the papers, and the returns in your desk, so far as the vote, returned 
in his (Mr. C’s.) favor was concerned? 

Answer—I do not know, although he may have done so. 

Question—State if you please, if the result of the vote, as pub¬ 
lished in the papers in regard to Messrs. Sambola and Campbell re¬ 
spectively, did not agree with the returns there in your office, before 
the same were corrected. 

Answer—I do not remember to have observed, either from the 
newspapers or returns, how the vote stood for any of the canditates. 
My attention was not called to it; the information that I gathered 
from the newspapers on these points, was simply from the editorial 
and reportorial remarks published therein. 

Question—State if you please, how long after the military board 
concluded the revision of the returns, the corrected returns were 
made upon the printed blanks, as are now 7 filed in the office of the 
Secretary of State. 

Question—My remembrancer, that I saw no returns, entitled to 
be called such, that were not made on the printed forms, which were 
referred to the board for compilation. 

The returns furnished to the Secretary of State by the command¬ 
ing general, were copies of reports and returns, made by the mili¬ 
tary board referred to, upon a form made by it (the military board). 
There are exact copies of the reports made by the board to the com¬ 
manding general. 

Preliminary reports w r ere made, as I remember, by one or two of 
the boards in the parish of Orleans, in order that the commanding 
general might have information in advance of the regular returns 
upon printed forms prescribed as they (the board) stated. 

Question—What boards made these preliminary reports? 

Answer—I cannot state positively what boards made those pre- 


40 


iiminary reports or returns, but one such report from the sixth ward 
is now among the papers in the office. I am also of the impression 
that the board of which Mr. J. E. Moore was chairman, made such a 
preliminary report. 

Question—State, if you please, if the paper, a copy of which is 
hereunto appended, market “A,” is one of the preliminary reports 
referred to. 

Answer—I think the one now before me, which I brought here, is, 

from the fact that it is not sworn to. and that it is not made on the 

• 9 

printed form furnished to the registrars. 

Question—State at what time the printed forms referred to were 
furnished by the registrars. 

Answer—Before I assumed charge of the Bureau of Civil Affairs, 
which was three (3) days before the election. 

Question—State under what authority the commanding general 
assumed to make and publish returns of the election of officers, 
others than members of Congress. 

Answer—Perhaps this is a question I should not assume to answer, 
but I understand that h#*ctid so under authority vested in him by 
the reconstruction acts of Congress. 

Question—Do you not remember that the acts of Congress, au¬ 
thorizing an election for officers to be held in this State, and prescri¬ 
bing the officers for whose election the commanding general should 
make returns, enumerated as such only members of Congress? 

Answer—I do not. 

Question—State, if you please, if you remember an application 
made to the commanding general, by the board of registration ap¬ 
pointed by the late constitutional convention of Louisiana, to have 
the returns of the election of State, parish and municipal officers 
sent to that board, as provided for by the ordinance of the consti¬ 
tution. 

Answer—I remember that application in writing was received 
from Mr. S. B. Packard, chairman of the said Board of Registration; 
that the returns, or copies of these should be furnished to him for 
the purpose of announcing the result of the election. My impres¬ 
sion is, without reference to the original application now on fde in 
my office, that he applied for the returns, or copies of them, of the 
entire election, constitution, and all officers voted for; but it is pos¬ 
sible he applied only for the returns specified in the inquiry. 




Question-—State, if: you please, what reply Wits made to this applb 
cation ? 

Answer—As near as I can remember, without reference to the 
copy of the reply now on lile in my office, it was in substance that 
the returns applied for had been refused to a military board for com¬ 
pilation and report as to the result of ^he election, and that when 
the report of said board should be made to the commanding general, 
he would, in orders promulgating the result for the information of 
all parties concerned. 

Question—State, if you please, if the commanding general recog¬ 
nized the authority of the Board of Registration to receive and pro¬ 
mulgate the result of the election for all officers except members of 
Congress ? 4 

Answer—My understanding of his views was that he did not. 

Question—State if the commanding general recognized the provi¬ 
sions of the ordinance of the constitution, relating to the election o f* 
officers for this State, as binding, or as having any force or authority 
whatever ? 

Answer—My understanding of his views was that he would, as far 
as he deemed it practicable under his obligations and powers, defined, 
by the reconstruction laws, act in accordance with the provision cf 
said ordinance, but that it was not binding upon him in all of its 
provisions. 

Question—State, if you remember, whether the commanding gen¬ 
eral did not hesitate for a long time whether to order a municipal 
election or not, and whether he decided to order it; he did not do so 
upon his own responsibility, without finding any warrant therefor in 
the reconstruction acts of Congress, and no other warrant in law, 
except that to be found in the ordinance of the constitutional con¬ 
vention. 

Answer—-The order of the commanding general for an election for 
municipal officers was issued, as will be seen by reference to its datc } 
and to my testimony herein before given, before I assumed charge 
of the department of civil affairs. Therefore, I do not know what 
arguments induced his order, or whether ho had any hesitation on 
the subject. 

By the lion. 1\ Harper. 

Question—State whether any reports were made to headquarters 
G 


1 J 

in regard to 
election ? 

Answer—I do not know of any. 

Question—Was that promulgation the one referred to in the com¬ 
munication of the commanding general to the Board of Registrars, 
which was subsequently issued to persons elected as State, parish or 
municipal officers as certificates of their election ? 

Answer—Orders were issued relative to State, parish, municipal 
and judicial officers. Copies of these were issued to the persons 
therein declared elected as certificates of election. 

Question—State whether there were any instructions previously 
given to the chairman of the Board of Registrars to appoint repre¬ 
sentatives from each political party in selecting the Commissioners 
of Election ? 

Answer— r As before stated by me, the instructions and regulations, 
under which the election was mainly conducted, were issued by 
General Hancock, General Buchanan’s predecessor. Whether any 
instructions to this effect, previous to the time referred to in my tes¬ 
timony, were issued, I am not aware. Certain it is, that as soon as 
as the subject was presented to the commanding general by the 
representatives of the Republican committee, he gave the matter his. 
most serious and prompt attention. 

By the Hon. Hugh J. Campbell. 

Question—State, if you please, what order was made by the com¬ 
manding general, after the election, with reference to the preserva¬ 
tion of the ballots? 

Answer—The ballot boxes were directed to be sealed, with the 
ballots inside, and transferred to the sheriff, who was held respon¬ 
sible for their security. Receipts of the sheriff of the parish of 
Orleans for these boxes are on file in my office. The registrars were 
charged to seal the ballot boxes, and to deliver them to the sheriff. 

By the Hon. P. Harper. 

Question—Was the answer made by the several chairmen of the 
Boards of Registrars, to the inquiry relating to the appointment of 
representatives from each political party as commissioners of elec¬ 
tion, deemed satisfactory by the commanding general ? 


military interferences, or in regard to frauds ill the late 


Answer—In cases where they answered that both parties were 
represented, it was satisfactory; in the others it was not. He (the 
general) deemed it insufficient that good men, without regard to 
party, had been chosen. His desire was that the good of both par¬ 
ties should be chosen; and, as I think I have before stated, had the 
subject been presented to him a sufficient time before the election, he 
would have ordered a change. In fact, as I have before stated, ho 
did order that both parties should be represented, the evening that 
Mr. Shelly, on behalf of the Republican committee, brought the sub¬ 
ject to his notice. This was the evening of the fourteenth, about 
forty-eight (48) hours before the polls were opened, and when the 
answers referred to were received, it was only a few hours before 
said polls were opened, too late to make the change he deemed de¬ 
sirable. This is a subject upon which he (the general) afterwards 
expressed regret, as his desire was that neither party should have 
cause of complaint of unfairness. 

By the Hon. Hugh J. Campbell. 

/ 

Question—State whether you were not aware that a majority of 
registrars and commissioners of election at the Fourth, Fifth and 
Sixth Wards of the parish of Orleans were Democrats, and whether 
that fact was not known at headquarters ? 

Answer—I did not then nor do I now know, and I am as certain 
as I can be of almost any fact that the commanding general did not, 
and does not, know of what party these men were or are. 

By the Hon. P. Harper. 

Question—Were there any instructions, given or implied, to the 
chairmen of the Boards of Registrars, that no colored persons should 
be appointed as commissioners of election ? 

Answer—I am certain that General Buchanan neither issued any 
such instructions, nor implied at any time that such was his wish. 

(Signed) B. B. KEELER, 

Brevet Major United States Army, 

Late Secretary Civil Affairs. 

Sworn to and subscribed before me, this twenty-seventh day of 
August, 18G8. 

(Signed) 


HUGH J. CAMPBELL, Chairman. 


44 

PARISH OF ORLEANS—FIRST WARD. 

Mr. John Clark swears that, on the seventeenth of April, at poll 
No. 2, precinct No. 1, he saw twenty men refused .permission to de¬ 
posit their ballots; and he further says that he told the men to go 
back again and deposit their votes, as that was the place for them to 
vote. 

At Poll No. 2, there was one man who remained there all day 
challenging the votes of nearly every colored man at times. He 
was, with other white men, allowed inside the engine house in com¬ 
pany with the commissioners. Several times I saw ballots lying on 
the table that were handed in by voters, and the men would leave 
supposing their ballots were deposited in the box. 

I further state that, in my opinion, in the two days of election, 
there were at least seventy-five or a hundred voters driven away by 
the engine party and other parties. 

Frank Hastings, being duly sworn, says that he saw Commission¬ 
ers of Election at No. 20 engine house take colored men’s tickets 
and drop them and put democratic tickets in the ballot box. That 
he saw about twenty (20) tickets done in the same way. That he 
knew the tickets to be radical tickets because they were white and 
given by colored young men, and had Lincoln’s head upon the top 
of the ticket. The twenty colored men that voted and had their 
tickets replaced by democratic tickets, voted with their tickets open. 
The democratic tickets were placed in the ballot box folded. That 
he knew the difference between the democratic and radical tickets, 
as they were of a different color. Policeman Campbell and colored 
men standing at the front say they saw about ten or twelve treated 
this way ; that forty or fifty (40 or 50) left the poll, being afraid of 
losing their situations. That he saw twenty (20) white men vote to 
(1) colored man. That he cannot say what the comparative number 
of white and colored men were at the polls. That the colored men 
were standing in two ranks ; this was the case on both days. The 
colored men numbered about one hundred (100) in each rank. The 
white men were not in line, but would go, directly vote, and leave. 
Saw ten or twelve white men go into the room and vote where the 
ballot box was. 


45 


Cross Examined. 

That lie counted twenty republican votes that were pushed behind 
the ballot box and others put in their place. Knows the difference 
between radical and democratic tickets. Got some of the radical 
tickets from the club room. 

Did not call any one’s attention to the fact that Republican tickets 
were thrown behind the box and Democratic tickets put in the bal¬ 
lot box instead, because he was afraid of being shot down. 

Robert McGee being duly sworn, says: That ho lives in the 
seventh ward, city of New Orleans, La., and that his attention was 
called to the registration papers of several colored men who were 
told by the commissioners, when they tendered their votes, that they 
must go to another poll. These men were entitled to vote at this poll, 
which was they first precinct, seventh ward; witness is of the opinion 
that not less than one hundred (100) were thus refused who were en¬ 
titled to vote at said poll, witness saw policemen drive colored men 
away from the poll, the colored men were orderly, and knew no reason 
why they were so driven away. Witness also saw policemen and 
other white men drive colored men from the poll on Hunter street; a 
colored man who had his ballot and registration papers in his hand 
was driven away and beaten; witness was at the Hunter street poll 
on the eighteenth for three fourths (f) of an hour: white men were 
driving colored men away from the poll; the white men had Demo¬ 
cratic tickets in their hands and the colored men had Republican. 
Witness estimates the number of colored men driven away from this 
poll at sixty (60), all voters, during the time he was there. 

S. Walker states on oath that he resides at No. 288 St. Thomas 
street, first district, first ward. On the day of election, April 17, 
1868, he was at the polls on Hunter street, poll No. 2, precinct No. 
1, ward No. 1; he went there at six o’clock, A. M., with fifty colored 
voters whose certificates of registration he examined and found cor¬ 
rect; he gave them each a republican ticket and took them to the 
poll; each and every one of these men were entitled to a vote at this 
poll but they were all refused except five. The reason assigned was 
that some one who knew nothing about these men had said that 
some of them lived in Carrollton and in different parts of the ward. 
The colored men volunteered to show where they lived but the com¬ 
missioners told them that they could not vote on account of their 


46 


votes being challenged; that they must go elsewhere, and if they 
came back to that poll again they would have them arrested. He 
then took them to number twelve’s house, poll No. 1, precinct No. 1. 

The commissioners there refused to take their votes, and told them 
to go to the Hunter street poll No. 2, which was the one they had 
just visited. About ten o’clock in the morning he again went to the 
Hunter street poll No. 2, with twenty-five men, each of whom had 
Republican tickets. 

The Commissioners refused all their votes except one, and told 
witness to take them back to No. 12’s house, which he did. The 
Commissioners then again refused their votes, and told them to go 
back to No. 2, on Hunter street. On arriving at poll No. 2, their 
registration papers were examined by the commissioners, who asked 
them if they were old enough to vote. They answered yes. They 
were also asked if they ever stole horses, mules or anything else, and 
were then told to go away and not to come back ; that if they did 
they would be arrested and locked up. A police officer was then 
called, and the men driven away. Many were obliged to leave their 
registration papers behind. 

During the first day of election, witness saw about one hundred 
and fifty men’s votes refused by the Commissioners of election at 
poll No. 2, precinct No. 2, to each of whom he had given Republican 
tickets. 

Early in the morning (April 18), witness and Dennis Williams 
went to the poll on Hunter street with forty-five or fifty men, each of 
whom had a Republican ticket. They halted them at the corner, and ' 

took two at a time to the poll to vote. All were refused except ten. 

The registration papers of those refused were examined by Colonel 
Young and S.. S. Fish, who pronounced them correct, and that they 
had a right to vote at said poll. 

During the two days of election witness brought to the two polls 
about three hundred or three hundred and fifty men, of whom only 
fifty were allowed to vote. All of the men who were refused would 
have voted the Republican ticket. 

David Gucrson states, on oath, that on the eighteenth day of April, 

1868, he went with three men to and from No. 12’s engine house, 
and thence to Hunter street. They were not allowed to vote at 
either of these places, and the registration papers of one of the men 
was taken away from him. Witness afterward went with him to the 




£irst Justice of the Peace, who took his affidavit in regard to tiffi 
loss of his papers. They then returned to No. 12’s engine house’ 
and found his registration papers lying on the table. He was told 
that he could not vote on two papers. A policeman who interceded 
for him was arrested and sent to Pacanier station. Witness further 


states that in his presence some twelve or fourteen men of colo r 
were not permitted to vote. He interceded for them, for which he 
was threatened with arrest by the deputy sheriff appointed for those 
days of election. 

Nelson Wordy, states on oath, that at the poll on Hunter street 
there was a line drawn between white and colored voters, that 
during the first day of election, April 17, 1868, there were about 
fifty colored voters present, and about ten or fifteen white voters; 
the latter were given the preference in voting. On the eighteenth of 
April, 1868, the last day of the election, two men handed in tlieir 
certificates at the same time; the commissioners refused to let them 
vote, stating that one man had handed in the two certificates, these 
two men did not vote while witness was there; one of them tarried 
for three hours, endeavoring to get his registration papers. 

Witness further states that at least twenty-five men who had affi¬ 
davits from Judge Gifford’s court were not allowed to vote, their 
affidavits had on them the seal of the court; this occurred during 
both days of election. Witness was registered in the parish of Jef¬ 
ferson. At first the commissioners refused to allow him to vote be¬ 
cause he was registered in that parish; when he filed an affidavit the 
commissioners said that it was not in due form, said affidavit had 
the seal of the court. Witness further states that at the poll at en¬ 
gine house No. 12, the Democrats challenged all the colored voters, 
these Democratic challengers were allowed inside of the poll where 
the ballot box was kept; witness remonstrated against this to the 
commissioners, but received no satisfaction; witness saw about forty 
colored men refused the right to vote by the commissioners, whose 
registration papers were examined and who should have been 
allowed to vote; he asked the commissioners to allow him the privi¬ 
lege accorded to the Democratic challengers of going inside the 
He received no answer to his request. 


room. 


I 



PABtStt OF ORLEANS -SECOND WARD. 


Michael O’Hara states on oath : That he was one of the supervi\ 
sors of the election held on the seventeenth and eighteenth of April, 
1868, appointed by the Board of Registrars of the State of Louisi¬ 
ana; that during the time lie was at the polls he saw a great many 
colored men turned away from the polls, and not allowed to vote be¬ 
cause they were too young, they said. The commissioner told a 
great many other colored men that they were not at the right poll. 
Deponent further states that he examined the papers of these colored 
men refused the privilege of voting, and found that they were at the 
right poll; but the commissioner still refused, alleging that they were 
too young. There were a great many who had lost their registra¬ 
tion papers, and made affidavit to the same, and were refused the 
privilege of voting on said affidavits. Witness saw Jerry Sullivan, 
deputy sheriff, at poll number two, precinct number three, at about 
0:30 P. M. on the eighteenth instant, come out on the banquette, 
take a handful of Democratic tickets, fold them and put them in the 
ballot box at this poll. During the election he saw Democrats take 
tickets away from colored men while they were in line, waiting their 
turn to vote, and give them Democratic tickets. By the intimida¬ 
tions practiced at this poll, it is the witnesses’s opinion that the Re¬ 
publican party lost a great many votes. 

Cross examination : Witness was on the banquette with a deputy 
supervisor, when he saw the deputy sheriff put the tickets (Demo¬ 
cratic) into the box; there were a number of persons standing 
around the ballot box at the time; very few were voting at the time. 
Sullivan and the commissioners were inside of the poll room; one of 
said commissioners was sitting at the table on which stood the bal¬ 
lot box; the other two were writing at said table. Any one looking 
into the room could plainly have seen Sullivan put said tickets into 
the box; deponent saw said Sullivan from the time he took the tick¬ 
ets on the banquette until he put them into the box. Mr. Sheehan, 
the deputy supervisor, also saw said act. Deponent is positive that 
said tickets were Democratic tickets; he coidd plainly distinguish 
from the outside appearance of the tickets that they were Demo¬ 
cratic, because the Republican tickets were shorter and much wider. 

E. T. Burnham, states on oath that he resides at 30 JL Carondelet 
street, second Congressional district; that he voted at the engine 


40 


house, corner of Perdido and Carondelet streets, at the election held 
in this State on the seventeenth and eighteenth of April 1868. De¬ 
ponent says, that he spent most ol his time at the polls during these 
days of election, that were located in the second, third and fourth 
wards; states that he voted the republican ticket, that the polls were 
managed by the democratic party; saw policeman and deputy sheriff 
take republican tickets away from negroes while they were in line 
waiting to vote, and give them democratic ones; he saw at least 
twenty or thirty freedmen swindled out of the tickets they desired to 
vote; deponent saw a policeman on duty at the poll corner of Per¬ 
dido and Carondelet streets take from the commissioner the registra¬ 
tion paper and ticket of the freedman offering to vote, and substi¬ 
tute a democratic ticket, and then hand it to the commissioner. In 
one instance in the fourth ward, he saw the commissioner and a po¬ 
liceman take a freedman’s republican ticket, lay it on the table and 
substitute a democratic ticket for it. Witness understood that one 
of the commissioners at this poll had been arrested for changing 
votes. Witness used his influence and endeavored to see that the 
freedmen were allowed to vote the ticket they desired, for this he 
was “hushed up” by the crowd, who appeared to be on the demo¬ 
cratic side and told that he must leave the polls. Witness states 
that all white men were always to vote without hinderance at No. 14 
engine house, on Common street, but that the freedmen were kept 
back until their number was increased to about two hundred. Wit¬ 
ness spoke to the policemen and deputy sheriff* about this unjustness 
to the freedmen, and the}' told him ho had nothing to do with it, and 
to mind his own business. A great many freedmen left this poll, 
not being able to vote. Witness was at this poll several times du¬ 
ring the day, sometimes would remain two hours, and always found 
a large preponderance of colored voters; there were at least fifty 
colored to one white voter. Witness could not get the names of the 
policemen and deputy sheriff at this poll, only two of the policemen 
had numbers on their hats; the colored men were driven out of line 
and white men putin their places to vote. Witness saw largo num¬ 
bers of white men have free access to the commissioner’s room where 
the ballot boxes were kept, and use their influence for the success of 
the Democratic party. 

A. J. Whittier being duly sworn says, he is resident and voter of 
the Second Ward; says he was a Supervisor of the late election, in 
particular at twelve’s house, Tchoupitoulas street; that he was a 
Deputy Sheriff, appointed by Avery, and saw at least one hundred 
7 ’ 


I 


% 


so 


Votei's on the 0r3t clay excluded from voting; that lie- examined the 1 
papers of those men; they were regular and correct. He examined 
regardless of opinion; these were all colored. What called his at¬ 
tention was they were all colored. There was a young fireman 
stationed near the poll; as fast as the colored voters would come he 
would say to them : “ you can’t vote here,’’ without even examining 
their papers. I called his attention to the fact that no man was au¬ 
thorized to challenge, according to general orders, except the com¬ 
missioners; took those men to the commissioner, and compared their 
papers with the poll book. Notwithstanding this they were refused, 
and forced to retire from the poll by the police, and did not vote. 
Toward night said he went to Hunter street poll; he saw about 
twenty-five colored voters whose papers he examined and found cor¬ 
rect, were not allowed to approach the poll; these papers were ex¬ 
amined at the outskirts of the poll; the men were driven away by 
men who boasted during the day that they would drive all the damned 
niggers away. On the second day, eighteenth of April, went to 
twelve’s eDgine house, and saw the same proceedings going on; was 
the same as the day previous; about the same number was rejected. 
He examined about one-third of their registration papers. These 
men were rejected by the commissioners; to the best of his knowledge 
these men did not return to vote. Affidavits of lost papers were re¬ 
jected. Says the poll was closed about five o’clock, on account of the 
rain; all those that were outside went away without voting. At the 
time of the closing of the poll the engine house was filled up with 
commissioners, policemen, firemen and deputy sheriffs; tw^o of the 
deputy sheriffs took hold of him, saying : “By what right do you in¬ 
terfere with the papers of voters.” I replied that I was a supervisor 
commissioned by the Board of Election. They wanted to know if I 
had reference to Packard & Co. I said that I had. They said that 
they did not recognize anything from that damned institution. I 
also said that I was deputy sheriff’, and showed my badge. They 
told me that I must pull out my papers and show them, which I re¬ 
fused to do. They then told me that I must leave the engine house 
or they would kill me. I claimed protection from the police, and 
asked for an escort to get to the door. I was refused. I then backed 
out to the door on the sidewalk; they there crowded me on the ban¬ 
quette, crying and shouting : “kill him—shoot him—cut him—the 
damned Yankee son of a bitch.” 

Cross examined : About two hundred votes were excluded on both 
days; witness cannot call the names of any of the men, but has a 


> 


51 


large list of them at home. This was at poll one, precinct one, first 
ward; knows that thev did not come back to vote. 

Dennis Downey states on oath, that he was the policeman on duty 
at precinct No. 4, poll No. 2, Ward No. 2. He saw a negro named 
Stephen W atson attempting to vote. He had a republican ticket. 
Witness went to the negro and asked him how long he had been in 
the city. He answered, only three days; that lie had just arrived 
from Georgia. Witness looked at the affidavit upon which Watson 
offered to vote. It was one taken before Justice Gifford, and was 
signed by him and, with his mark, by Watson. The contents of said 
affidavit went to prove that Watson had been duly registered in the 
parish of St. Martin (as witness believes). That he had lost his 
registration certificate; and that he had been residing in New Or¬ 
leans for ten days previous to the day of .voting. Watson told wit¬ 
ness that he had never been registered anywhere, and that lie had 
never lost any paper or certificate of registry. He said a man came 
to him on that day, or a day previous, took him to the office of the 
magistrate, made him raise his right hand and read something to 
him which he did not understand, then gave him the papers and a 
ticket and told him to go and vote. 

Watson had a radical republican ticket in his hand, and offered to 
vote it. Upon his above statement witness arrested him on the 
charge of perjury, and gave his affidavit to J. H. Moore, chairman of 
the Board of Registrars for the Second Ward, and sent Watson 
to jail. Witness saw G. W Mader at the poll aforesaid. Mader 
was a candidate on the republican ticket for the State Senate. Wit¬ 
ness had all the men at the poll divided into two lots, the whites and 
blacks apart, and each lot in rank on either side of the door leading 
to the polling place. Mader came and walked in front of the whole 
line of the negroes, and required each to show the ticket he had and 
intended to vote. Whenever a democratic ticket was shown to him 
by a negro, he took it out of his hand and tore it in pieces, and 
made him take a republican ticket in its place. 

Witness saw Jordan, the colored drummer, take democratic tickets 
from the hands of the negroes and give them republican ones in 
their stead. He would jerk Ike democratic tickets out of their hands 
violently, ask them who had given them such tickets, and whether 
they would vote them. He would then tear them to pieces and give 
them radical tickets, and told them those were the tickets they 


52 


should vote. Jordan was very violent in his talk and manner to the 
negroes. 

Witness then resided at No. 223 St. Thomas street, and now lives 
at 230 Annunciation street. 


PARISH OF ORLEANS-THIRD WARD. 

In this parish the following is a brief summary of the evidence 
offered to the committee to establish frauds. 

II. P. W. Sort states on oath that he was an acting deputy sheriff 
in the city of New Orleans, on the seventeenth and eighteenth days 
of April, 1808. He went on the morning of the seventeenth to poll 
three, precinct three, third ward, to deposit his own vote. The com¬ 
missioners of election refused to receive his vote, saying his name 
was not on the list. He called their attention to the order giving 
persons who had a right to vote in any other parish the privilege of 
voting here, if they had been in the parish or ward ten days or more 
previous to the election. They said they had no instructions to 
receive such votes. He then went to Captain Scott, chairman of the 
Board of Registrars, and informed him of the facts of the case; 
whereupon he sent said commissioners instructions to receive such 
votes. According to his instructions, lie (Sert) then proceeded to 
visit the different polls in said ward, to see how the election was 
being conducted. 

At the poll on Tchoupitoulas street, between Lafayette and Girod 
streets, he saw the vote of a colored man rejected on the grounds 
above mentioned. He showed the commissioners the order of Cap¬ 
tain Scott relative thereto. One of said commissioners replied that 
he had nothing to do with the order, and if he (Sert) interfered with 
his business he would tear off his badge as deputy sheriff and have 
him arrested. The votes of several men were rejected on the same 
grounds. 

Republican tickets were handed to this same commissioner by 
voters and changed by him for Democratic tickets, and said tickets 
deposited in the ballot box contrary to the washes of the voters. 
This commissioner w T as finally removed. 

The commissioners at all the polls were in this way conducting 
the election in a most fraudulent manner. 





He reported these facts to the Adjutant General who replied that 
that was none of his business—his duty was only to preserve the 
peace. 

At polls where the colored voters outnumbered the white voters 
the colored men were hindered and obstructed in their voting on the 
most frivolous pretexts. At engine house No. 18 a man came 
quietly to vote the Republican ticket; a loafer seeing this, asked him 
if he had not made a mistake ? The man replied no—that he knew 
what he was about. The loafer then told him that he was a “ damned 
white nigger if he voted that ticket.’’ After voting he left the polls, 
and in passing a corner near by, he was met by said loafer and 
others, who knocked him down and beat him brutallv. 

7 t/ 

J. W. Quinn, William J. Furness and James A. Finn, supervisors 
of election in the Third Ward, report that the polls were opened and 
closed at the proper time, but the commissioners of election in this 
ward (Third Ward) were all partial to the Democratic party, and 
placed all obstacles in the way of colored men voting. One commis¬ 
sioner of election, by the name of White, serving in the fifth pre¬ 
cinct, changed a Republican ticket for a Democratic one, placing the 
latter in the box. All of the deputy sheriffs, principally composed of 
ex-rebel soldiers and thugs, electioneered openly for the Democratic 
party. They also used every means to intimidate colored voters by 
abusing them. James A. Finn, one of our supervisors, was arrested 
for instructing colored men where to vote. Witness further state 
that said James A. Finn was kept in confinement for twelve hours, 

Adolph Adams states, on oath, that he resides on Julia street, in 
the city of New Orleans, in the Third Ward of said city, and that he 
had resided in said ward and city for two months previous to the 
election, and that he presented himself at poll No. 2, sixth precinct, 
Third Ward, for the purpose of voting the Republican ticket, but 
was refused on the ground that he had registered in the parish of St. 
James, and was told that he must go to that parish and vote. 

Captain W. L. Evans states, on oath, that he is a resident of the 
city of New Orleans, Louisiana, and that he had a conversation with 
Jacob Van Zant, chairman of the Board of Commissioners of Election 
at poll No. 1, precinct No. 1 , city of New Orleans, on the seventeenth 
or eighteenth day of April, 1868, at which time said Van Zant 
acknowledged that he had prevented three or four hundred (300 or 
400) colored voters, who were legally entitled to vote from voting, 


. 54 




ancT that he did so because Simon Jones had made no overtures to 
him, and he was determined to defeat said Jones and others at all 
hazards. 

Jacob Van Zandt, states on oath, that during the election of April 
17 and 18, 1868, he served as a commissioner of elections at poll 
No. 1, precinct 7, ward No. 3. An individual offered to vote on 
registry papers No. 418, issued in favor of William H. Nicholls; he 
offered to vote the Republican ticket; he was sworn, and upon being 
questioned under oath he gave a different name and residence from 
that contained in his certificate, by virtue of which he claimed the 
right to vote; his vote was refused and he was arrested. Some time 
after another individual wanted to vote the Republican ticket on 
registration certificate No. 69G9, issued in favor of George Malcomb; 
when sworn and questioned under oath, this man too, gave a differ¬ 
ent name and place of residence from that contained in the certifi¬ 
cate; this man was arrested and on his person was found another 
certificate of registration, No. 1594, issued in favor of Peasant 
Brown. The name and residence given by this man did not corres¬ 
pond or agree with those contained in either above named certifi¬ 
cates. The man stated after his arrest, that one of these certificates 
belonged to a colored man who had voted upon it, but the certifi¬ 
cate was not marked “voted,” as was required. Both of these colored 
men were placed under oath because their votes were challenged. 

Witness was an officer in the Union army during the late war, 
and could take the commissioner’s oath, and was appointed by Cap¬ 
tain Scott, the chief registrar. On Sunday morning, the day after 
the election, between the hours of eleven and twelve o’clock, he was 
approached by a person who said he came from the headquarters of 
the Republican party, where, he said, all the prominent leaders of 
said party were assembled. Witness understood him to mean that 
he came from the Republican Central Committee, and that lie was 
authorized to speak for them. He first sent a note, in which he in¬ 
formed witness that he wished to see him on important business, etc. 
As chairman of the commissioners at his poll, witness directed that 
the person be admitted, and he came in. Aside from other persons, 
he spoke to witness as follows: “You can have the place of Chief of 
Police; 3 r ou was foolish in not letting certain parties know that you 
was one of the commissioners. If you had done this you could have 
made a very nice thing out of it. Lewis, the candidate for Mayor* 
is running ahead, and he will be elected by a large majority; but we 
are afraid for Jones, candidate for Congress. If he is defeated, Lewis 


I 


will appoint him Chief. The Republican party oi* committee desired 
Jones to get three hundred majority at that poll (witness’), and that if 
witness could increase that majority one hundred, so as to give Jones 
four hundred majority at his poll, it would insure his election, and 
in that event witness should be appointed Chief of Police.’’ This is 
in substance what this person said to witness; something else, 
about giving him money, was also said, but witness cannot remem¬ 
ber now exactly what it was. Witness was angry and excited, and 
for that reason failed to note particularly what was said. He re¬ 
jected the proposition with indignation, and declared it to be his 
purpose to secure a fair election, as far as it was in his power. 

Witness knows that at the poll at which he was not a single 
illegal vote was cast for the Democratic ticket. Many attempts were 
made to cast fraudulent votes for the Republican ticket, but these 
attempts were defeated by himself and other officers stationed at his 
poll. On the last day of the election during three or four hours there 
were but few votes cast, and during said time hundreds of votes 
could have been polled had they been offered. Witness further states 
that at his poll everything was conducted fairly and squarely and' 
about nine hundred votes were legally cast. 


PARISH OF ORLEANS—FOURTH WARD. 

B. F. Joubert, states on oath, that during the seventeenth and 
eighteenth days of April, 1868, at the poll corner of Conti and Basins 
Mr. Sambola went to the men who were distributing Republican 
tickets and got a number and commenced scratching names from 
them and substituting others; information of this fact being given 
by witness to the men so distributing, they went and took the tick¬ 
ets from Mr. Sambola, at which he became very indignant and called 
for a police officer, saying that he had been insulted; witness remon¬ 
strated with him and told him that he was in the fault, whereupon 
he became very much excited and said he would “go after his Sicil¬ 
ians,” (many of whom were appointed deputy sheriffs by sheriff 
Avery). Witness told him that he did not care for him nor his 
Sicilians; that if any one was to be arrested it was him, as he tried 
to incite a riot, but if his “ Sicilians” were to come they would be 
well received, “as we were well prepared for them.” At the poll 



66 


Corner of St. Peter and Claiborne streets there Were a great many 
voters, the majority of which were colored; they were divided into two 
ranks, one for white and one for colored, and went up to vote two 
by two, alternately, as there were about twenty colored men to live 
white men; this was not fair; five colored men should have been 
allowed to two white men. 

At the poll on St. Philip street a colored man presented his certifi¬ 
cate and desired to vote. The commissioner took it and told him to 
come the next day (eighteenth). He replied, “If I cannot vote to¬ 
day, then give me my certificate.” But they would not, but said 
they would give it to him the next day. This man was born in the 
city, and had never been out of it. 

On the eighteenth, at the poll on Orleans street, Mr. Montamont, 
Mr. Lemarie, and others, brought up a freedman, who wars much 
frightened, to make him vote. Mr. Crozat, commissioner, questioned 
the man, who was not able to tell his residence (as he had none), so 
he refused to receive his vote. These gentlemen then took him to 
poll one, on St. Peter street. Witness also proceeded to said poll, and 
informed the commissioners that this colored man was a vagrant, and 
objected to his vote being received; but one of them said if there was 
a witness present who could swear that the colored man had been in 
the parish ten days preceding the election, they would accept his 
vote. One of the party who brought him said he would swear to 
that fact, and his vote was received, when the party left him. Wit¬ 
ness, seeing that he was crying, asked him what was the matter. 
He replied that those men promised to give him two dollars, but had 
not done so. 

At the poll on Orleans street the commissioner refused to receive 
the vote of a man who had lost his registration papers, but pre¬ 
sented an affidavit to that effect, sworn to before a “notary,” stating 
that he was acting under the orders of Mr. Fields. 

Several Cicilians, acting as deputy sheriffs, were drunk and noisy. 

Everything was carried on on the Democratic side. Democrats 
were allowed inside the poll room, but Republicans were not. Demo¬ 
cratic candidates were admitted inside, but not a candidate of the 
Republican party, nor any member of that party, -was allowed the 
same privilege. Many Republican voters were prevented from 
voting by the arrangements at the polls. 

The deputy sheriffs in the Fifth and Sixth Wards were generally a, 
set of “thugs” and Cicilians of bad character. Some few were men 
of good character. 


J. P. Mollere states oil oath, that during the election of April 17 
and 18, 1868, in the Second District, fourth and fifth wards, fifteen 
or twenty colored men were arrested, who went to the polls to vote, 
and who had a right to vote. These men were locked up in jail and 
not released until after the election. At the polls, and particularly 
at Pelican 4, fourth ward, the colored men were made to fall in by 
twos and vote in rotation by turns; but when white men arrived, 
they were allowed to come immediately to the poll and vote without 
delay, crowding back the colored men who sometimes had been 
waiting hours before them. Nine out of ten of the deputy sheriffs 
appointed by Dr. Avery, sheriff of the parish of Orleans, tried to 
make the colored men believe that was not the right poll for them 
to vote at, and thus kept them traveling from poll to poll about the 
district. 

A majority of these deputy sheriffs were of the class of men known 
in the parish as thugs, cut throats and assassins. Some of them had 
served their time in the penitentiary. During the five days that the 
registration was open before the election, over five hundred (500) 
men, to witness’ own knowledge, were allowed to register by the 
registrars appointed by Gen. Hancock who were clearly disfran¬ 
chised by the reconstruction acts of Congress. 

On the morning of the seventeenth of April, 1868, one of the 
judges of election in the fifth ward told a gentleman that he had 
received instructions from Mr. Fields, chairman of the board of 
registrars, to use all the means in his power to defeat the constitu¬ 
tion. 

After the election, the prisoners that were arrested on the days of 
election in the Second District, were brought before Recorder Gasti- 
tinel, who talked a little to them, telling, them to go home and be¬ 
have themselves and say no more about it, or w T ords to that effect. 

The statement in regard to deputy sheriffs is not intended to ap¬ 
ply to the deputy sheriffs all over the city, but to a majority of‘those 
in the Second District. 

A fair election in the Second District, city of New Orleans, on the 
seventeenth and eighteenth days of April, 1868, would have resulted 
in a republican majority of from ten to twelve hundred. 

E. J. Jenkins states, on oath, that he was chairman of the Board 
of Registrars for the Fourth Ward, Second District, city of New 
Orleans; that he appointed two commissioners, (Mr. Baumbach and 
Mr. Valias), for said ward; that the other ten commissioners were 
appointed by his colleagues, Messrs. Haile and Davis; that both 
8 


58 




these gentlemen were democrats; that there were no particular rules 
or regulations concerning the appointment of commissioners from 
each political party. Witness knew nothing of the politics of the 
tc3ti commissioners appointed by his colleagues; the two that he ap¬ 
pointed were Republicans. Witness received a letter from military 
head quarters making inquiry relative to the politics of the commis¬ 
sioners of election, to which he replied that the commissioners had 
been appointed without reference to their politics. Witness’ impres¬ 
sion is, that his colleagues being democrats, took matters into their 
own hands. A difference of opinion having arisen between witness’ 
colleagues and himself in relation to the registration of Mr. Charles 
Gayare, witness suggested to Colonel Gentry, that a change be made 
in the Board of Registrars, but does not know that any statement 
was made by the colonel to the General commanding, and no change 
was made. We (the Board of Registrars) received the ballot boxes 
from the commissioners of election. After the count had been made 
and turned them over to the sheriff of the parish, George W. Avery, 
and received a receipt for the same, and turned it over to military 
head quarters. 

Question. What was done with the ballots and other records of 
your ward ? Describe the whole process from the time the polls 
were closed until you finally gave up possession of all the records of 
the election. 

Answer. The ballots, tally lists and poll books were put into the 
ballot boxes which were then sealed and delivered by myself to the 
sheriff of the parish, George W. Avery, and I took his receipt for the 
same. I also delivered the books of my office and the records fo 
Captain J. E. Scott, detailed by orders from head quarters to receive 
them, and took his receipt for the same. 

Several days elapsed (say ten or twelve) from the time the boxes 
were delivered to me until I turned them over to the sheriff) durinsr 
this time they w r ere under the care of the board of registrars aided 
by two policemen especially detailed to attend to our office; no one 
was permitted to meddle with or touch the boxes during this time, 
except the members of the board of registrars and the clerk of the 
board. 

Mr. Haile,-Mr. Davis, witness and Mr. Waterman the clerk of the 
board, opened the boxes for the purpose of examining the tally lists 
and making up the returns, and to compare the commissioners’ re¬ 
port, as we had to condense their report. Witness was present 
during the time, and this was all done under the supervision of the 


59 


board. There were some twenty-six certificates of registrati >n taken 
from persons attempting to vote, by the commissioners of election 
at poll No. 1, precinct No. 9. 

Witness understood they were taken on the grounds of the par¬ 
ties attempting to vote twice. 

These certificates were turned over to Messrs. Haile and Davis by 
the commissioners, and by them turned over to -headquarters. 
Witness was not consulted personally in this matter, though he 
was chairman of the board. In one case Mr. II. J. Campbell, 
called witness’ attention to the taking of a certificate of registration 
from a person attempting to vote. Upon attempting to investigate 
the matter the commissioners of election threatened to arrest 
Mr. Campbell and witness. Witness called the attention of the po¬ 
liceman to the fact that the commissioners of election were acting 
under his orders. Witness was acting under authority from mili¬ 
tary headquarters. 

Witness understood from the commissioner that Captain De Hus¬ 
sey, of the army, authorized them to retain the certificates of regis¬ 
tration from persons attempting to vote illegally. 411 the ballot 
boxes of the fourth ward were sealed when they wore received by 
the Board of Registrars from the commissioners. In each box we 
found the ballots, tally lists and poll books. We did not recount the 
ballots. Mr. Colleagues and Mr. Waterman, the clerk, recounted the 
tales, and made up the returns of the ward from them. The ballot 
boxes, when turned over to Sheriff Avery by deponent, were all lock¬ 
ed, sealed and in a sound condition, with the keys attached. The 
boxes were turned over to Sheriff Avery by order of General Buchan- 

4 % 

an. The books turned over to Captain Scott were the registry book, 
(with index), the oath hook, the old poll books, articles of stationery, 
printed and other, that was on hand, with a copy of the returns made 
to headquarters. 

Witness did not count the registration certificates turned over to 
the board by the commissioners. No disposition was made by wit¬ 
ness of any of those certificates. On the second day of election sev¬ 
eral complaints were made to witness regarding injustice to voters 
by commissioners, deputy sheriffs and others. Witness investigated 
some of these complaints, and his conclusions were, from these in¬ 
vestigations, that many of the commissioners were not the right men 
for the positions; that they had erred through ignorance and politi¬ 
cal partiality, and that through this ignorance and partiality they had 
not conducted the election fairly in the ninth precinct. 


/ 


60 


Late on the last day of election witness received instructions from 
Colonel Gentry to change the commissioners at poll one, precinct 
nine, if they obstructed or delayed the voting; but it was too late 


then to make the change. 

"Witness supposed that ten out of the twelve commissioners ap¬ 
pointed for the fourth ward were Democrats. 

From what witness saw of the deputy sheriffs in the fourth ward, 
he thinks they performed their duties satisfactorily, having heard no 
complaints made against them by the commissioners or others. 

Augustus Davis states on oath, that he is a resident of New Or¬ 
leans, and was a registrar of voters in the fourth ward, Second Dis¬ 
trict, and continued to act as such until after the election of April 
17 and IS, 1868. At the close of the election witness thinks that the 
ballot boxes were taken to the sheriff’s office by an order from head¬ 
quarters Fifth Military District. When the count of the commission¬ 
ers was finished, and the reports had been made by them and handed 
to the registrar's office, the boxes were sent to the office, enclosing bal¬ 
lots and commissioners’ returns. In two or three days, witness believes, 
they were sent to headquarters in order to have them recounted. 
The returns were made by the commissioners of each poll and hand¬ 
ed to the Board of Registrars. It was the duty of the registrars to 
consolidate the returns made by the different commissioners, and 
report the general result of the ward to the Commanding General. 
It was the duty of the Board of Registrars merely to make a report 
of the returns of the commissioners, and also to supervise the con¬ 
duct of the election. 


Question—What was the character of the returns made to you by 
the commissioners? 

Answer—They were what was generally termed tally lists; that 
is, a paper containing the names of all the candidates, and opposite 
each the marks or tallies which were made as the ballots were called 
out. 

Question—Was it your duty, as registrar, to change or tilter these 
lists in any way? 

Answer—It was not. We would not feel justified in going back 
and correcting the mistakes of the commissioners. 

Question—By whose order were registration papers taken from 
voters in your ward ? 

Answer—I do not remember by whom the order was given, but 


61 


I 


there was a gentleman who came into the office and complained of 
papers being taken away. He was advised to go around to head¬ 
quarters and find out if they had a right to keep their papers. I heard 
afterwards that an officer from headquarters had been around to the 
polls where the complaint had been made, but I do not remember 
what answer he gave. No such order was given by the Board of 
Registrars, to my knowledge. Something like thirty or thirty-five of 
these certificates, taken from voters, were sent in to me from the 
precincts of the ward; the majority were from the ninth precinct. 
These were sent to headquarters after the election. 

Charles Cavanac States on oath, that he is twenty-nine years of 
age, and a resident of New Orleans. That he,was appointed a com¬ 
missioner of elections by the Board of Registrars, at the election 
held in the State of Louisiana April 17 and 18, 1868, for poll 1, pre¬ 
cinct 9, Fourth Ward, Second District; that the commissioners act¬ 
ing with him were Charles Haupt and T. H. Hughes; that in poli¬ 
tics he is a Democrat, and thinks his colleagues belonged to that 
party; that he lived in the State when it seceded from the Union, 
but was opposed to secession; that he never served in the Confed¬ 
erate army or held any position under the Confederate government; 
that he was in the city during the war, and was not liable to military 
duty, having but one arm; that he declines stating whether he did 
or did not favor the reconstruction of this State under the recon¬ 
struction acts of Congress at the time of the election above re¬ 
ferred to; that at this poll, witness caused the men to approach 
the polls in two ranks, one colored and one white, and received the 
votes alternately from each. This mode was adopted to facilitate 
the voting, as there was room enough for two persons to come up at 
once. Witness showed no partiality to either party in taking the 
votes. There were more colored people than white about the polls 
during the days of election. That the division of the voters, as 
above stated, was in accordance with both written and verbal orders 
from the Board of Registrars. 

That parties who had lost their registration papers and presented 
affidavits were allowed to vote, if the affidavits were found to be 
correct. In some instances, persons presented affidavits with names 
entirely different from those they gave as theiis when questioned. 
In others, affidavits were presented by parties who, by close exam¬ 
ination, were found to have already voted and to have their papers 


62 


about their persons. In still other cases of colored men, tlieir pa¬ 
pers would state that they lived at such and such places, when, upon 
examination, it was ascertained that they did not live at such place, 
nor even in the ward stated. Such persons were not allowed to 
vote, and in some cases were referred to the Board of Registrars. 

When the commissioners were satisfied that the party presenting 
a ballot was a legally qualified voter, and had not already voted, 
they allowed him to vote. About twenty-five or thirty registration 
certificates and five or six affidavits on which votes were refused, 
were taken away from colored men and retained by the commis¬ 
sioners. This action was based upon witness’ own judgment and 
instructions from the Board of Registrars. Said instructions were 
written and verbal; the latter were given to witness by each member 
of said board, viz: Mr. Jenkins, chairman, and Messrs. Haile and 
Davis, and the former was signed by Mr. Haile. 

About twenty-five or thirty persons were arrested and locked up 
for attempting to vote fraudulently, or for disturbing the peace. 
Witness thinks some of these were released the same dav. 

•j 

Ail arrests made were justifiable in the judgment of witness and 
in accordance with the law and instructions under which lie was 
acting. The voting closed Friday evening at seven o’clock. The 
box was at once sealed in presence of all the commissioners and 
their signatures written on the paper which was placed over the 
hole, and conveyed by Charles Haupt, one of the commissioners, 
accompanied by a deputy sheriff, to the central station in pursuance 
of orders from head quarters, and a receipt taken for same. Satur¬ 
day morning, the eighteenth, the same commissioners received the 
box and brought it to the polling place, and the seals were then 
examined by all the commissioners and found to be in the same con¬ 
dition as on the night previous. The seals were then taken off in 
presence of all the commissioners. The voting closed at seven P. M 
that day, and that witness immediately, in presence of the two men 
appointed by the Radical party to withess the count, placed a paper 
over the hole.. Said witnesses expressed themselves entirely satisfied 
with the proceedings. 

The counting of the ballots commenced at once, and was con¬ 
tinued without intermission until about two o’clock, A. M., Monday, 
when the count was completed. The two supervisors of the Repub¬ 
lican party were present during the entire time thus occupied, and 


63 


* 


expressed themselves perfectly satisfied with the count, and with the 
treatment they received As soon as the count was finished, the bal¬ 
lots, poll books and tally lists were placed in the box, and the box 
scaled in presence of the commissioners and witnesses, and carried 
by deponent accompanied by two deputy sheriffs and one police 
officer to the central station, and placed in a cell aud the cell locked, 
witness kept the key of this cell and took a receipt for the box. 

This was clone by written orders from military headquarters. On 
Tuesday, in accordance with instructions, witness brought the box 
from the said station to the office of the Board of Registrars for the 
fourth ward, and delivered it to them in the same condition and 
with the same seals as were placed on it by the commissioners. 
Complaint was made to General Buchanan (witness thinks by Mr. 
Ingram), that tw r o of the commissioners at the above named poll 
were acting wrong, but stating the witness was doing his duty in 
an impartial manner. Captain DeRussey, a staff officer of the Gen¬ 
eral commanding, came down in pursuance of instructions to in¬ 
vestigate the charges; he examined the papers and stated that the 
reasons assigned for the arrest of the parties were sufficient, and in¬ 
structed the commissioners to continue this course when they had 
sufficient cause so to do. Captain DeRussey gave the commission¬ 
ers no particular instructions with regard to taking away registra¬ 
tion certificates, but he knew they had done so, because he examined 
the papers, and sustained their action. 

Witness further states that Jerry A. Hall presented himself to 
vote; J. A. Dorvin a deputy sheriff said to witness, “that man has 
already voted,’’ and upon being sworn by the commissioners made 
oath that he had been an eye witness to that fact. 

C. I 1 . Haupt states on oath that he was a commissioner of election- 
at poll one, precinct nine, Fourth Ward, corner of Basin and Conti 
streets. On the seventeenth of April, 1868, there was no disturb, 
ance. On the eighteenth, some little disturbance accompanied the 
arrest of Mr. Cavanac. Soon after this Mr. William Baker presented 
himself to vote; his name not appearing on the books, he was refused, 
and was told by the commissioners to go to the registration office 
and have his papers fixed, so that he could vpte in that ward. He 
refused to go, saying that it was not his business, and demanding the 
names of the commissioners, said that he would prefer charges 
against them and have them arrested and locked up in the Parish 




trisoh. He also made a complaint to Captain DeRiissey, of General 
Buchanan’s staff, and said Captain DeRussey asked deponent the 
reason why they would not allow said Baker to vote. They informed 
him that Baker’s name did not appear on the rolls of that ward, 
adding that his vote would he received if he would have his papers 
fixed by the Registrars. 

That Eugene Staes came to the poll and demanded the registration 
papers that had been taken away from voters; when they were handed 
to him he wanted to know why they were taken away; deponent told 
him that the charges were written across the registration papers in 
red ink. Mr. Staes continued talking very loud, and said that he 
would settle with deponent after the election, which remark occasioned 
quite a stir about the poll. 

Mr. William Baker was ordered to be arrested by Captain De- 
Russey, who was present at the poll, and sent to the Parish Prison. 

On the first day of the election the voters were allowed to vote as 
they came up, but on the eighteenth the deputy sheriffs received 
orders, from some source unknown to deponent, to form the voters 
in two ranks, thus allowing one white and one colored voter to vote 
at the same time. 

The commissioners allowed all voters, from other parishes, who 
had resided in the city ten days or more previous to the election, to 
vote for all officers, State, parish and municipal, whenever their 
names appeared on the registry list of said parish; those whose 
names did not so appear, were not allowed to vote, but were referred 
to the Board of Registrars. 

During the election, there were allowed in the room, the parties 
who lived in the house, two deputy sheriffs, United States officers of 
General Buchanan’s staff, and, by orders of Captain DeRussey, Gen¬ 
eral Sypher and Mr. Campbell were also admitted for a few minutes. 

On the seventeenth of April, after closing the polls, the ballot box 
was duly sealed, and taken by deponent to the Second District 
police station, and delivered to the man who had charge of the books 
at that station, who gave a receipt for the same. Mr. Cavanac, the 
chairman retaining possession of the key. 

On the morning of the eighteenth deponent returned for the box, 
and conveyed it to the said poll, where it was opened by Mr. Cavanac. 
Deponent was accompanied each time on Ids way with the box by a 
deputy sheriff and two police officers. 


05 


Question. State how many registration papers were taken by you 
from voters. 

Answer. Not less than thirty nor more than thirty-two. They 
were taken away by the commissioners in compliance with orders 
from General Buchanan, received by them through Mr. Haile, a 
member ot the Board of Registrars. Captain DeBussey gave or¬ 
ders that where there were men who insisted on voting the second 
time to take away their registration papers and send them to prison } 
and to indorse the reasons for so doing in red ink aeross the face 
of the certificate. The papers taken away by the commissioners 
were turned over to the Board of Registrars; E. 0. Haile has them. 

Question. On the first day of the election what was the proportion 
of colored and white voters who come to vote. 

Answer. Do not know the proportion. 

Question. State the names of any deputy sheriffs that you may 
remember at that poll. 

Answer. George Wilson, Charles Pallace,* Jack Obetau, Jack 
Lawless and William Buckley. 

Question. At the closing of the polls on the first day what was 
the relative number of white and colored votes on the record. 

Answer. The whites were ahead between thirteen and fifteen. 

Question. At the end of the second day what was the propor¬ 
tion for that day. 

Answer. I do not remember, but the colored votes were ahead. 
The record book was turned over to the Board of Registrars, we 
had two blank books for entering names as parties would vote, a 
poll book with the names of registered voters for this poll, tally lists, 
printed lists from some country parishes; do not remember which 
ones. 

Question. Slate whether your board did not refuse at first to re¬ 
ceive votes on affidavit in cases where registration papers were lost. 

Answer. Yes. 

Question. State the circumstances of the refusal of Mr. Camp¬ 
bell to vote upon his affidavit of loss of papers. 

Answer. The orders from the Board of Registrars, were, not to 
# receive any votes from those whose names did not appear on the 
registry book, but refer them to the Board of Registrars for that 
ward. 


9 


Question, Were ymi i.bt aware of the order of (General Buchanaffi 
in relation to receiving votes upon affidavits? 

Answer. 1 had never seen the order. Did not receive a copy of 
it, and did not know there was such an order issued only by hearsay 
from outside parties. Mr. Campbell was not allowed to vote upon 
his affidavit when he first presented it. The order above referred to 
was written and signed, either by Mr. Haile or Mr. Jenkins I can 
not remember which. 

Question. State positively whether that order directed you to re¬ 
fuse to receive votes presented on affidavit of loss of registration 
papers. 

Answer. I suppose it did allude to them as well as to any one 
else, or we construed it in that light. 

Question. Did the order include that class of cases expressly in so 
many words f 

Answer. That order did not, but an order after that did. 

Question. What reason had you for construing the order so as to 
include these cases of affidavits ? 

Answer. No affidavits were rejected whose names appeared on 
the fourth ward poll book for that poll, but by orders from the Board 
of Registrars all affidavits were rejected whose names were not on 
the registry book for that poll. 

Edward Hashing, sergeant of police, states on oath that many 
colored men were brought to the Second District police station dur¬ 
ing the seventeenth and eighteenth days of April, 18G8, charged 
with illegal voting. Notwithstanding the orders of the late Chief of 
Police forbidding police officers from interfering with the election, 
three court officers of the Second District Recorder’s Court made 
themselves quite prominent electioneering for the Democratic party, 
and when ordered to desist by Lieut. Bradley, they declined to obey, 
and continued so to do during the whole course of the election, pro¬ 
tected by Recorder Gastinel, who was then running on the Demo¬ 
cratic ticket. The officers referred to were A. Prados, Duffey and 
Taney. 

P. Z. Canoge, special police officer, states, on oath, that the com¬ 
missioners at the poll on Robinson had three colored men arrested 
and sent to the lock up and kept their registration papers. 

At the poll on Basin street (Pelican No. 4) they were sending men 
to jail by squads of three or four at a time. Witness proceeded to 


67 


* 


the pull corner ol‘ St. Peter and Claiborne streets for the purpose of 
, depositing his own ballot, Mr. Pardos, a commissioner told him that 
was not the place for him to vote, but to go to number ten’s house, 
which he did, and there found Mr. Sambola with the commissioners 
challenging colored voters, and was on the point of challenging 
witness’ vote. Witness asked Mr. Fleche, a commissioner, if Mr. 
Sambola was a judge or a commissioner of elections. He said “ no.’’ 
W itness then ordered Messrs. Sambola and Thomas out of the engine 
house, threatening to lock them up if they did not obey. Mr. Sam¬ 
bola said if he was elected he would “ fix him,’’ and that “ at night 
he would show the niggers who would have the best of the election.” 
At Pelican No. 4, on Basin street, Mr. Sambola said “he could have 


a band of Sicilians there in five minutes to clean out the niggers,” 
and that “ he would have the best of the election at night,” and that 
“they did not arrest the damned niggers fast enough.’’ 

Peter Williams states, on oath, that at the poll corner of Conti and 
Basin streets, on the eighteenth day of April, 1868, the commissioners 
of election, Messrs. Haupt, Cavanac and Hughs, refused to receive 
the vote of witness, and unlawfully and fraudulently retained his 
affidavit of loss of registration papers. Witness desired to vote the 
Bepublican ticket. 

Gustave Baltliazer, Samuel Hamilton, Charles Hamilton, John 
Anderson, August P. Cazer, Samuel Richardson and William Brent, 
state on oath that the commissioners of election at the poll corner of 
Conti and Basin streets, at the election of April 17 and 18, 1S68, re¬ 
fused to receive their votes and had them locked up in the parish 
prison and retained their certificates of registration. 

They were discharged during the next week by recorder Gfastinel, 
with about (40) forty others, who asked them “if they were willing to 
go home now and let the case drop and say nothing to any one.” 

The same commissioners refused to allow Jacob Moley to vote who 
applied on the seventeenth of April 1868, about six P. M., saying it 
was too late, but did allow other men to vote—this man wished to 
vote the republican ticket. 

They also refused to allow Reuben Kyer to vote on the next day. 

Auguste Lapoude states, on oath, that on Friday, April 17, 1868, 
he went to the poll in Exchange Alley, and presented his ballot to 
the commissioners of election, at the same time handing them his 
certificate of registration. While he was waiting their decision as 


ct 


68 


to whether they would receive his vote or not, some live or six white 
men were allowed to vote. Presently one of the commissioners . 
ordered a policeman to take him away, and the commissioners looked 
at each other and laughed. Witness demanded his certificate ol 
registration. The police officer told him to hush or he would lock 
him up; that this was the order of the man inside. The commis¬ 
sioners then ordered him to come again, and asked him if he could 
bring a man who lived in the same yard with him. He called up a 
colored man, who told the commissioners that lie did live in the same 
yard with him. The commissioners said they did not want a black 
man as witness, and refused to take his evidence, saying : “If you 
can’t bring a white man to prove where you live, you can’t vote.” 
The policeman then said to him: “You needn't look after -sour 
paper; let it sweat. We’ve done gained.” Witness persisted in his 
demand for the return of his certificate, and the policeman there¬ 
upon threatened to lock him up, “if he bothered that man again 
and did not go away.” Witness, in fear of being arrested, did go 
away from the poll, and did not vote at that election. Said commis¬ 
sioners retained his certificate, refused to receive his vote unlawfully 
and with intent to defraud him of his vote, and deter and terrify 
others of his color and political sentiments from voting. The ticket 
he desired to vote was the Republican ticket, and the said police 
officer was in collusion with the commissioners to deter and frighten 
witness and others from voting as they desired. Witness is a quali¬ 
fied voter. 

John A Miller states on oath that he is a resident of New Orleans, 
that he applied on the third day of April 1868 at the registration 
office corner of Rampart and Canal streets to be registered as a 
voter. E. J. Jenkins was chairman of the board and was present. 
Witness was sworn and qualified, and the registrars then gave him 
a paper purporting to be a certificate of registration, and said regis¬ 
trars did so represent to him, telling him “to take good care of it.” 
Witness is unable to read and believed the representations of said 
registrars. On the eighteenth of April 1868, witness went to the poll 
corner of Conti and Basin streets to vote, and was then informed 
for the first time said certificate was incomplete in this that it lacked 
the signature of the registering officer; he immediately applied to 
said Jenkins at his office to have the omission rectified; said Jenkins 
took the certificate and wrote upon it an endorsement in red iplv 


% 


and returned it to witness saying that “if lie troubled him any more 
about it lie would have him arrested.” Witness believes that said 
omission on the part of said registrar to sign his certificate was will¬ 
ful and with the intent to deceive and to defraud him of his vote; 
that by said deception he was deprived of his vote at said election, 
and that if he had voted, he would have voted the republican ticket. 
On the third day of April 1868, witness lived at 59 Tremc street, 
New Orleans. 

Samuel Phillips states, on oath, that he was a registered voter in 
the city of New Orleans in April, 1868, and that on the eighteenth 
day of that month and year he presented his ballot to the commis¬ 
sioners of election, Messrs. Cavanac, Hughes and Haupt, at the poll 
corner of Conti and Basin streets, and with it his certificate of regis¬ 
tration. Said commissioners refused to receive his ballot and fraud¬ 
ulently retained his certificate and caused him to be arrested and 
conveyed to the parish prison and there to be confined in a cell with 
criminals and felons where he remained until the twenty-first day 
of April, 1868, when he was brought before A. Gastinel, Recorder of 
Second District, who said to him: “ old man you can go if you are 
satisfied with voting twice.” Witness answered, “ I have not voted 
at all yet, sir,” and showed him the ticket which he had taken to the 
polls to vote. The Recorder said that such was the charge against 
him, and that he could go if he was satisfied, and then discharged 
him. 

On his way to prison witness asked the police officer what this 
meant, and he replied, “nevermind; come along—this is to show 

you d-d niggers how to vote.” This unlawful and oppressive 

arrest and imprisonment by said commissioners was malicious and 
willful and with the intent to defraud witness of his vote, and to 
terrify and deter others of his color and political sentiments from 
voting, and that in consequence thereof he did not vote at that elec¬ 
tion, and that he would have voted the Republican ticket. 

Ben. Williams states, on oath, that he was a registered voter in 
the fourth ward, city of New Orleans, in April, 1868, and on the 
seventeenth day of that month and year, he presented his ballot to 
the commissioners of election, Messrs. Cavanac, Hughes and Haupt, 
together with his certificate of registration. Said commissioners 
refused to receive his vote, retained his certificate, without assign¬ 
ing any cause therefor, and ordered a policeman to arrest him and 



70 


place him in confinement. The policeman took him to the parish 
prison, where he remained till the Saturday following, when he, with 
others similarly confined, was brought before Recorder A. Gastinel, 
who remanded him back to prison, where lie remained till the Mon¬ 
day following, when he and twenty others were handcuffed, and 
taken before said Gastinel, who again remanded them to prison On 
Tuesday following, witness and twenty-three others were again 
brought before said Gastinel, who informed them that there were no 
charges against them, and asked them if they were willing to go 
home and say no more about it to any one, and then discharged 
them. 

In consequence of said false imprisonment, witness did not vote 
at said election ; had he done so, he would have voted the Republi¬ 
can ticket. 

William Dunbar states, on oath, that he was a registered voter in 
New Orleans, in April, 1868 ; that he was not allowed to vote, and 
was caused to be arrested and imprisoned by Messrs. Cavanac, 
Hughes and Haupt, in a similar manner to those hereinbefore de¬ 
scribed. 

Milton Johnson states, on oath, that lie was a registered voter in 
the city of New Orleans, in April, 1868 ; that he was deprived of 
his registration papers, and not allowed to vote by Messrs. Cavanac, 
Hughes and Haupt, in a similar manner to those hereinbefore 
described. 

Franyois Treponi states on oath, that at poll 2, precinct 13, Fourth 
Ward, during the election of April 17 and 18, 1868, the commission¬ 
ers of election did unlawfully and fraudulently receive and deposit 
in the ballot box the ballots of seven white men whom they did not 
require to produce any certificate of registration, and they did not 
exhibit or produce said certificates. Said seven men voted the 
democratic ticket. 

Louis Bohn, acting sergeant of police at Treme station on the 
seventeenth and eighteenth days of April, 1869, states on oath, that 
the following is a correct statement of the number of men arrested 
in the Second District on those days, as taken from the records of 
the station: 

Charged with attempting to vote twice or with voting fraudu¬ 


lently...... 16 

Charged with perjury.. . 20 

Charged with creating disturbance at the polls.... 8 


44 





Of this number thirty were ordered to be arrested by commis¬ 
sioners Cavanac, Haupt and Hughes. 

Henry Young states, on oatli, that he was a registered voter in 
the city of New Orleans in April, 1868. That on Friday, April 17, 
1868, at poll two, precinct nine, the commissioners of election refused 
to receive his ballot, and took away and kept his registration certifi¬ 
cate, and sent him to jail, where he was confined till Tuesday, April 
21, 1868. 


William H. Hire, a resident and qualified voter in the city of New 
Orleans, states, on oath, that on the eighteenth day of April, 1868, 
at the poll at the engine house of Pelican, No. 4, the commissioners 
of election took from colored voters their certificates of registration, 
and retained the same. In one case a man had two witnesses with 
him to prove his identity, and the commissioners committed him to 
prison. 

The commissioners of election at the poll corner of Conti and 
Basin streets, in addition to those already mentioned, refused the 
ballots of seven Republican voters, who were entitled to vote at said 
poll, and retained their registration papers, and had them arrested 
and sent to the Parish Prison, where they remained from two to four 
days, and were then brought before Recorder Gastinel and dis¬ 
charged. 

The commissioners of election at the poll corner of Conti and 
Basin streets, in addition to those before mentioned, refused the bal¬ 
lots of five (5) Republican voters, who were entitled to vote at said 
poll, and retained their registration papers. 

Robert Bradley states on oath that he is an aid to the Chief of 
Police of the city of New Orleans; that on the seventeenth day of 
April, 1868, he was acting as lieutenant of the Second District po¬ 
lice; that at different times during the day he was present at poll 
one, precinct nine, fourth ward, known as Pelican Four Engine 
House; that at those times there were large crowds of colored 
voters waiting an opportunity to vote, and very few white men. 
The number of colored voters averaged from fifty to one hundred, 
and that of the white voters from ten to twenty, more or less. Wit¬ 
ness requested one of the commissioners to furnish him with a list 
of that day’s balloting, which was furnished, and is hereto annexed 
as a part hereof. 


Charles l 1 '. Haupt, commissioner at said poll, reports to Lieutenant 
Bradley the following number of votes polled on the seventeenth 
day of April, 1868, at that poll: Number of white votes polled, 143; 
number of colored votes polled, 132. 

George Jones, a duly registered voter of the fourth ward, states 
on oath, that on the eighteenth day of April 18G8, at poll 1, precinct 
9, Fourth Ward, he found a large number of persons present, and 
could not easily get to the poll to vote, so he told the commissioners 
he was going to vote the Democratic ticket, when lie was at once ad¬ 
mitted, but as they saw he held the republican ticket, he was told to 
go back among the “nigger voters” but at last was admitted, and 
noticed a man coming from the back door with a handfull of 
tickets which he deposited next to the ballot box; this man then 
voted. When the commissioner received witness’ ballot he had 
another ballat in his hand, with a rooster on it and dropped witness’ 
ballot and put the other ballot in the box, and then told witness that 
this should be the last d—d ballot which any nigger should be al¬ 
lowed to put in the box, thus trying to make witness believe that he 
had put his ballot in the box. 

It. C. Howard, a duly registered voter of the Fourth Ward, states 
on oath, that on the seventeenth day of April, at poll 1, precinct 9, 
he saw men pass into the poll room and vote from inside. He be¬ 
lieves from seventy to seventy-five colored men were illegally pre¬ 
vented from voting on that day and at that poll. 

George Nelson and Edward Thompson state on oath, that they 
were prevented from voting on the ground that their certificates of 
registration were not correct. 

Alfred Nelson states on oath, that he was prevented from voting 
on the ground that his certificate of registration was not correct; 
and was told by the judge of election that if he did not go away 
from the polls he would be imprisoned. 

Moses Dobson states on oath, that he was prevented from voting- 
on the ground that his certificate of registration was not correct. 
His certificate was retained by the judge, and he was driven from 
the polls and threatened with imprisonment. This was at poll 2, 
precinct 9, Fourth Ward. 

The above refers to the election of April, 1868. 

Charles Dowden states on oath, that during the election of April, 
1868, he presented himself at poll 1, precinct 9, Fourth Ward, to 


vote. His ticket was deposited in the ballot box, and the judge, 
after so depositing it, took a ticket out of his own pocket and de¬ 
posited it also in the box. 

Witness asked him his reasons for so doing, and he replied that 
it was none of his business. 

Hale Kinney states on oath, that at the election of April 17 and 
18, 1868, he was prevented from voting on the grounds that his cer¬ 
tificate of registration was not correct, lie was imprisoned and his 
certificate retained. Witness gave bail in the sum of two hundred 
dollars, which it cost him nine dollars to do. 


PARISH OF ORLEANS—FIFTH WARD. 

Alfred Rougelot, candidate for Clerk of the Fourth District Court 
on the regular Republican ticket, states on oath that on Friday, 
April 17, 1868, at the poll at engine house No. 21, Fifth Ward, the 
commissioner of election refused the ballots of several colored men, 
whose papers were correct. Mr. Bonneval, the commissioner, sub¬ 
stituted other tickets for those handed him by the colored voters. 
This was done in the style of one thoroughly conversant with the art 
of trickery. 

Wm. J. Brewer, a supervisor of election, states on oath that at 
the seventeenth precinct, Fifth Ward, on the seventeenth and eigh¬ 
teenth days of April, 1868, several men who came to vote and pre¬ 
sented their certificates of registration were refused by the commis¬ 
sioners. Some for being too young, and others because their regis¬ 
tration papers had been stolen ; witness saw registration papers 
taken away and not returned. Several times the commissioners 
attempted to avoid receiving votes by pretending that the names of 
the voters were not on the list ; but witness, standing by, would 
look over the list and show them the names, and thus foil them in 
this attempt. On the first day the majority of the votes cast were 
Republican, but when the ballots were counted the most of the 
tickets on the bottom of the box were Democratic, showing that the 
box must have been stuffed previous to its being opened. 

Mr. Sambola, candidate for the State Senate, was several times 
allowed by the commissioners to stand behind the bar and challenge 
voters. He would remain about ten minutes at a time, and was 
there during the two days of election about three times each day. 

10 



74 

The commissioners were Mr. Levy, Mr. Fleche and one oilier, 
(name not, given.) 

John Smith states, on oath, that the commissioners of election al 
Poll 2, Precinct 12, Fifth Ward, on the seventeenth or eighteenth 
days of April, 18G8, tore the registration papers of two legally qual¬ 
ified voters and refused to receive their votes. 

Vincent Gallas states, on oath, that on the eighteenth day of April, 
18G8, at the poll corner of Galvez street and Bayou Bond, he saw 
commissioner Louis Prados take Republican tickets out of the ballot 
box and put others in their stead. The way he did was as follows: 
lie would put the tickets in the box leaving the end sticking out, 
and, placing a book nearly over the hole, would draw them out under 
cover of said book. 

Joseph August, a resident and registered voter in the city of New 
Orleans, states on oath that on Friday, April 17, 1868, a colored man 
went to the poll on Dumaine street, between Bampart and St. 
Claude, and presented his ballot to the commissioners of election, 
w r ho refused to receive it. Mr. Fleche, one of said commissioners, 
challenged his vote. The man then demanded the return of his 
certificate of registration, but said commissioner (Fleche) refused to 
return it, and ordered him away; but soon returning, again demand¬ 
ed it, when said Fleche said to him, “You damned black nigger, go 
away from here, or I will make you go away,” and threatened to 
have him arrested. On Monday following, this man met Commis¬ 
sioner Fleche on the street, and again demanded the return of his 
certificate, whereupon Fleche drew his cane, and afterward his re¬ 
volver and threatened to kill him. In consequence of this conduct 
on the part of Fleche, this man did not vote at said election, and 
this was done not only to defraud him of his vote, but to discourage 
and deter others of his color from voting. Said Commissioner 
Fleche remarked to this man, “We don’t return any niggers their 
papers, nohow.” This man would have voted the regular Republi- 
can ticket. 


PARISH OF ORLEANS-SIXTH WARD. 

New 0 bleaks, April 25, 186S. 

To the Chairman and Members of the Board of Registration : 

The undersigned regularly appointed by your honorable board to 
supervise the late election in the sixth ward of the city, beg leave to 
submit the following report : 



75 


The authority vested in as by your honorable body, andtl o powers 
which we have by virtue of our office delegated to the deputies which 
we saw fit to appoint, having been utterly disregarded, admittance 
in the polls, refused the examination of the poll books, forbidden by 
the chairman of the board of registrars of the second district and by 
the commissioners appointed by him. Your supervisors feel unable 
to expose and establish at present the numerous and gross frauds 
that have been perpetrated in the sixth ward at said election. The 
facts hereinafter stated, have occurred and been reported to the 1111 - 
dersigned, but there being certainly some foundation in the innu¬ 
merable reports that are daily made to us. We would postpone our 
final report until we have completed a thorough investigation of all 
the facts already commenced under our auspices. 

We would however report the following: 

J. R. Jourdain, one of the supervisors, affirms, and he is able to 
prove that Mr. Fremaux, who lives near the corner of Ursulines and 
Tonti streets, did vote, said Fremaux having’ held the offices 
of Assistatant Alderman and of Deputy Sheriff, and having afterward 
served in the Confederate States army as captain, is thought to be 
discfranchised. 

Joseph Felix Jaillot, deputy supervisor at poll No. 2, thirteenth pre¬ 
cinct, affirms that at said poll, the registration papers of one Antoine 
Larrazine, colored, causelessly taken from him by the commissioners; 
he, Joseph Felix, upon asking said commissioners for what reason they 
had taken the papers of said Larrazin, and his vote, was ordered 
away, and upon his remonstrating that he being regularly appointed 
deputy supervisor he had a right to interfere; he was threatened 
with imprisonment by the commissioners of election. 

J. P. Lewis, late captain in the United States army, saw at poll 
No. 2, fourteenth precinct, a deputy sheriff, whose name shall be 
ascertained, take out tickets from the box with small tongs. 

Davis Rocker, No. 282 Hospital street, saw at the same poll Com¬ 
missioner Prados draw out, in several instances, certain tickets from 
the ballot box, and substitute‘other tickets in their stead. 

Also, at the same poll, Jean Durant saw a deputy sheriff, whose 
name will be ascertained, taking tickets out of the box. He (Jean 
Durant) says lie saw said deputy sheriff put tickets of some voters, 
‘‘colored, 77 in the ballot box, being careful to leave out a little piece 
just enough to catch hold of ; then put a book on lop of the aper- 


76 


jure, and when he thought he was not seen, slip his fingers under, 
the book, take out the ticket and throw it behind him. 

A respectable citizen of the ward, Mr. Broil Mathe, can testify to 
the latter fact. Independent of these frauds, which have, in our 
opinion, bee-n practiced upon a very large scale, the commissioners 
sought to embarrass or intimidate the voters who were thought to 
be Republicans, annoying them with frivolous and unnecessary ques¬ 
tions. 

Many who can testify to that fact were asked, among other tilings: 

When were you registered ? What month, what day V If these 
answers were satisfactorily given, they would ask whether they were 
married or single, or something equally frivolous, and upon stating 
their residence, as appearing on the registration paper, they would 
ask the colored man offering to vote, whether he lived in the frame 
house of Mr. Somebody, or in the brick building of Mr. Somebody 
else, and how many rooms he occupied there, etc , and upon a failure 
of the voter to make a ready answer to these questions his papers 
were kept, his vote refused, and if he remonstrated was sent to 
prison. 

At Poll No. 1, fourteenth precinct, in the presence of policeman, 
No. 273, James Taylor, colored, was arrested, and sent to jail under 
a charge of perjuiy made by Commissioner Neville, because he could 
not state exactly on what day he had drawn an affidavit of Judge 
Giffen, dated the fifteenth inst. 

Republican challengers were at every poll threatened with impri¬ 
sonment, while Democrats were even permitted to make answers for 
some voters who claimed to have lived fifteen years in the precinct, 
and who could neither speak nor understand French or English. 

Edward Tinchant, Republican, was threatened with imprisonment 
at Poll No. 1, fourteenth precinct, by Commissioner Neville, because 
he handed over the registration papers of a colored voter of some 
country parish, whom he know had lived four months in the pre¬ 
cinct, and whose vote had been refused, while the next moment a 
registration paper of some Democratic 'voter was received without 
any objection or remark by said Neville from the hands of Fremaux 
(Democrat) 

At every poll in said sixth ward the white voters were placed on 
one side, and the colored on the other, and any policeman on duty at 
said polls can testify to the fact that at least three of the former to 
one of the latter were permitted to vote. 


t 


\ 


77 


The commissioners of election handled the tickets, and did not 
allow colored voters to put them in the box themselves. 

As far as we have been able to ascertain, the following are the 
names of the commissioners at the several polls in the sixth ward. 
Some of them are thought to be unable to qualify: 

At precinct thirteen, poll No. 1, L. Curien, John Roux and- 

Delaliousaye. 

At precinct thirteen, poll No. 2, Andry, Victor Leclerc and Bois- 
mard. 

At precinct fourteen, poll No. 1, Bercier, Tholozau, Lagarique.and 
Neville. 

At precinct fourteen, poll No. 2, L. Prados, Lefeore and Castanede. 

We would also respectfully call the attention of your honorable 
board to the numerous affidavits filed in your office by citizens and 
voters of the sixth ward, and especially upon one of the police offi¬ 
cers, Hennessey, who found in a desk at poll No. 1, thirteenth pre¬ 
cinct, some twelve or more folded Republican tickets marked on the 
back, some “Wai-moth,’’ and some “colored.’’ 

It seems, however, that the frauds perpetrated in our ward during 
the two days of election, stupendous though they were, were not 
sufficient to elect certain parties, as in the counting of the votes it 
was deemed necessary to complete by false accounts that which the 
stuffing of the boxes and the votes fraudulently received and wrong¬ 
fully rejected had failed to accomplish. At poll No. 1, thirteenth 
precinct, the deputy supervisor, John Schultz, and Edward Tinch- 
ant, were admitted only one hour after the poll had been closed. 
Edward Tinchart kept tally rolls, which were found all throughout 
the counting to correspond with those kept by the commissioners; 
and still, in the case of E. Staes, whose official returns from said 
poll have been seen by said Edward Trinchart at headquarters, fifth 
military district, said E. Staes is there credited with one hundred 
and seventy votes only, while on the original tally rolls of that 
poll he had one hundred and ninety-five votes. The official returns 
of said poll having so far been withheld, we cannot point out other 
defects or alterations that may exist. 

At poll No. 2, same precinct, the supervisors were refused ad¬ 
mittance, and when at last Mr. Bougelot (Republican) was admitted 
into the room, the ballot box was open, and tickets were scattered 
on the table* 



I 


78 

At Poll No. 1, fourteenth precinct, Mr. Alfred Young and Captain 
Alcide Lewis were not allowed to look at the tickets while the names 
of the candidates were called out. Captain Lewis further affirmed 
that the colored vote entered in the poll book did not correspond 
with the colored counted in the returns, and also that tw T o tickets of 
the Workingmen party, which he saw when the tickets were first 
taken out of the box, were nowhere to be found or seen after the 
vote had been counted. 

The undersigned respectfully submit the foregoing to your con¬ 
sideration, and they pray that in order to clearly and undeniably 
establish that the Republican party has been, in our opinion, de¬ 
frauded in the sixth ward of at least four hundred votes, further 
time be granted to them, and that they be vested with some author¬ 
ity to pursue an investigation that will enable your honorable 
board to ascertain exactly to what extent the frauds have been carried 
on in this ward by the commissioners of election—all Democrats 
according to their own statement. 

(Signed) WILLIAM GEORGE, 

Chairman Board of Supervisors, Sixth 'Ward. 

ALFRED L. YOUNG, 

J. B. JORDAIN. 

Samuel McCarty, a policeman in the city of New Orleans, states 
on oath, that during the days of election, the seventeenth and eigh¬ 
teenth of April, 1868, he was on duty at poll 2, 13th precinct, sixth 
ward. About seven or eight persons were permitted to vote with¬ 
out producing any registration papers, among whom were Mr. Lips¬ 
comb, Mr. Morel, Mr. Payeau, Paul C. Laresche, and Louis Mestier. 

The commissioner refused to receive the ballots of about ten or 
twelve colored men who presented themselves. Upon examination 
their certificates were found correct and they were at their proper 
polls, but as they could not distinctly pronounce their names in cor¬ 
rect English (they being French), they were ordered away, and their 
papers retained by the commissioners. 

On the eighteenth, when the polls were closed, witness was or¬ 
dered away from the poll room by the commissioners of election 
though he had positive orders to remain there. 

Admittance was also refused to members of the Republican party, 
though it was finally reluctantly granted. 

Eugene dc Lagarique states on oath, that on the seventeenth 


79 


and eighteenth days of April, 1808, he was a commissioner of elec¬ 
tions at poll 1, precinct 14, sixth ward. Eight or ten colored per¬ 
sons were not allowed to vote and were imprisoned, as their certifi¬ 
cates were supposed to be fraudulent. The certificates were re¬ 
tained by the board of commissioners. 

Mr. Neville was present when the ballots were counted. The 
counting of the ballots commenced at 11, P. M. The representatives 
of the Republican party were admitted as soon as the polls were 
closed and before the ballot box was opened. Witness does not re¬ 
member how many colored votes were cast at this poll, but thinks 
there was a majority of thirty-eight in favor of the Democratic can¬ 
didates. 

Capt. Scott, together with Mr. Neville, took the box away after 
the count was completed. 

There were many more votes cast by colored men at this poll 
than by white during this election. All the tickets cast by colored 
voters were endorsed “colored.” 

Alfred Rougelot states, on oath, that admittance was refused the 
supervisors of the Republican party at Poll No. 2, thirteenth pre¬ 
cinct, sixth ward, on the evening of April 18, 1868, until after eight 
o’clock, and then, when admitted, they found the Ballot box opened 
and the tickets assorted on the table. Francis Boisman seemed to 
be acting as chairman of the board of commissioners. The deputy 
sheriff was intoxicated and remained so until the next day. Mr. 
Dellile, one of the commissioners, slept during the whole night. 
Every now and then the commissioners would drink freely, and used 
every effort to induce witness to drink with them, but he would 
not. 

Wholly disgusted with this mode of proceeding witness left the 
poll on Sunday the nineteenth, before the count was completed, 
notifying the commissioners that he should protest against the unfair¬ 
ness shown by them to the representative of the Republican party. 

Edward Tinchant states, on oath, that on Friday, April 17, 1868, 
at poll one, precinct fourteen, sixth ward, a colored man, whose 
vote had been refused, came and told witness, who examined the 
case, and finding that injustice had been done, spoke to one of the 
commissioners about it, and convinced him that the man was entitled 
to vote; but he was not at this time allowed to do so. At this mo¬ 
ment Mr. Neville, chairman of the board of commissioners, came 


Bn 


/ 


lip and ordered witness away, threatening to have him arrested, and 
said he would not allow any man to present the papers of a third 
party. Witness remained near the polls, and shortly afterward Mr. 
Freemaux (a man well known for his rebel proclivities), handed to 
said Neville the papers of a white man he had brought up to vote, 
and the} 7 were received without hesitation or remark. 

General Sypher came to the polls soon after, and after an investi¬ 
gation, the colored man above referred to was permitted to vote. 

L. J. P. Capla states on oath, that a man by the name of Emanuel 
Barrier, having lost his certificate of registration, obtained a dupli¬ 
cate from the registrars and presented it to the commissioners of 
election on the eighteenth day of April, 1868, at the poll on Ursu- 
lines street, but they refused to receive his vote, and ordered him 
away, retaining his certificate and thereby preventing him from 
voting the Republican ticket. 

Witness saw one of the commissioners take the Republican tick¬ 
ets given by voters, and pretend to write on them behind the ballot 
box, but cannot certify that they were the same tickets handed by 
the voters to the commissioners to be put in the ballot box. Some 
of the Democratic tickets were put in the box by the voters and 
some by the Commissioners. 

Davis Rocher states, on oath, that on the seventeenth day of 
April, 1869, at Poll 2, Precinct 14, a citizen voted the Republican 
ticket. Mr. Prados, commissioner of election at that poll, pretended 
to drop said ticket into the ballot box, but in reality substituted 
another ticket in its stead and placed it in the box. Jean Durant 
was also a witness to this act. 

John Durant, a resident of New Orleans, states, on oath, that on 
the eighteenth day of April, 1868, at one poll -in the sixth ward, 
whenever a Republican voted his ticket would be put half way into 
the ballot box and a bible placed over it. When the commissioners 
saw no one looking at them they would take the ticket that they had 
put half way into the ballot box out and drop it on the floor. Wit¬ 
ness was present at the above mentioned poll during the election 
of April, 1868. 

Capt. William George states on oath, that on the seventeenth and 
eighteenth days of April, 1868, he was supervisor of election, and 
that registration was not fairly conducted in the sixth ward. 
White men who presented themselves were immediately sworn and 


/ 


81 


received their registration papers, without question, while colored 
men were very closely examined, and confusing questions were pro* 


, pounded to them. 

On the seventeenth day of April, 18G8, at poll 2, precinct 14, two 
colored men were not allowed to vote, and their certificates of regis- 
^ tration were retained by the commissioners. 

Witness went to the commissioners and demanded an explanation, 
whereupon they at once returned the certificates and received the 


votes. 


Samuel Jones slates on oath, that on the seventeenth day of April, 
18G8, four registered voters went to poll 1, precinct 14, sixth ward, 
to vote, but were refused by the commissioner, who told them that 
was not the place for them to vote. They went to all the polls of 
that ward and met with similar refusal. They then went to the 
registrar’s office, who, after examining their papers, pronounced them 
correct, and directed them to poll 1, precinct 14. They returned 
to that poll, but were agained refused by commissioner Neville, who 
threatened them with imprisonment if they dared come back. 

Ten (10) men presented themselves to vote at the poll on Great- 
men street, ninth ward, on the eighteenth day of April, 18G8. 
These men were registered in some country parish and had certifi¬ 
cates of residence, but the commissioners of election refused to re¬ 
ceive their votes. An order was then procured from some officer of 
the staff of Gen. Buchanan to the effect that the commissioners of 
election should receive the votes of the aforementioned ten men. 
They then returned to the poll, but were again refused, and were all 
driven away and scattered by a mob, acting evidently under sug¬ 
gestions of the said commissioners. 

J. F. Juillot states, on oath, that he was supervisor of election at 
poll tw r o, precinct two, sixth ward, on the seventeenth and eight¬ 
eenth days of April, 18G8, and that the commissioners of election 
would put the ballots of colored men who voted the Republican 
ticket under the ballot box, instead of in it, and tell the voter it was 
all right. One of the supervisors for the Republican party remon¬ 
strated with the commissioners for this, and was ordered away from 
the poll by the judge of election, who would not recognize his right 
to be there, though he presented his commission from the Board of 
Registrars. When the polls closed on the night of the eighteenth, 
the commissioners refused to allow said supervisors to be present in 
his official capacity to witness the counting of the ballots, but ordered 
him away and closed the door against him. But peeping through 
11 


82 

\ V* > ^ i * 

the keyhole, he saw that they had already Counted a portion of the 
votes. About fifteen minutes afterward the door was opened and he 
was invited to come in, but he declined, thinking if any wrong had' 
been contemplated, as he suspected, it had probably been accom¬ 
plished; but informed them that he should protest against this box 
being received, as frauds had been perpetrated. At this some per¬ 
son unknown to him called out: “You d—d son of a b—h, this elec¬ 
tion is lost to you. ,; 

David Hennessy, a police officer, states, on oath, that on the even¬ 
ing of April 17, 1868, at poll one, on St. Philip street, after the polls 
were closed, there was found on the floor, under the table where the 
ballot box was sitting, twenty-four Republican ballots, marked 
<£ white ” and “colored,” and on the eve of the eighteenth were found 
two hundred and sixty-one more Republican ballots on the floor, 
making a total of two hundred and eighty-five ballots that had evi¬ 
dently been cast, and should have been counted. Witness took par¬ 
ticular notice how this was done. The voters would hand the tickets 
to the commissioners, who would drop them on the floor and substi¬ 
tute Democratic tickets in their stead. The commissioners at that 
poll were all Democrats, and belong to a club called the Innocents. 

Philip Montane, states on oath, that on the seventeenth and 
eighteenth days of April, 1868, at poll two, precinct fourteen, three 
or four persons presented themselves to vote, who were entitled to 
vote at this poll, but commissioner Louis Prados would not allow 
them to do so; one of them named Stevens was arrested and sent to 
jail and his papers returned by the commissioners. Upon Mr. 
Prados being asked his reasons for so doing he replied (to the per¬ 
son asking) “i( you do not shut your jaw you will follow him.’’ 

Mr. Sambola, candidate for the State Senate, told the commission¬ 
ers that he would see all the niggers swept from the polls. 

Commissioner Louis Prados during the two days of election was 
plainly seen from time to time at intervals when no one was votiner 
stuffing the ballot box with Democratic tickets; he put in at least 
one hundred and fifty, and probably two hundred. 

O. J. Rigaud states on oath, that on Sunday, April 19, at poll one, 
precint fourteen, after the ballots had been counted, two commission¬ 
ers of election had before them the roll containing the names of the 
Democratic candidates, and the tallies or pencil marks indicating 
the number of votes they had received, and said commissioners 
were adding to these marks or tallies other marks as rapidly as they 
could, without any tickets on the table before them or in the ballot 


box, nor did they make any pretence of adding these tallies from 
ballots counted. The number added was from one to two hundred 
marks to each candidate, as near as witness could esiimate. Upon 
witness asking them what they were doing, one of them replied 
that if was the instructions of Captain Scott. Witness said, “I will 
immediately report you to the military authorities.” The chairman 
said, “What are you doing here?’’ Witness replied, “it is the 
right of every citizen to watch the counting of the vote.” He 
answered, “I will arrest you.” Witness: “You cannot. I came 
here to watch you." A person then took witness by the arm and 
said, “I will show you that the tickets are on the table,” but he 
failed to do so. One of the commissioners then said, “Oh ! my 
friend, the tickets were counted this morning, but we have kept it in 
our heads. The names of these two commissioners are William 
Neville and Mr. Tholozan. 


Certain parties wanted a commissioner of elections at poll two, 
precinct thirteen, to allow them to put Democratic ballots in the 
ballot box, but he refused. 

John Williams states on oath that on the eighteenth day of April, 
18(18, at the poll at corner of Bayou Road and Galvez street, a 
colored man came to vote. Commissioner Prados asked him con¬ 
fusing questions, and finally refused to allow him to vote, and had 
him arrested, charging him with being drunk, and retained his regis¬ 
tration papers. At the same poll, about three or four o’clock P. M., 
witness saw the said Commissioner Prados stuffing'the ballot box by 
placing his left arm on the box, and with the right hand putting 
bundles of tickets, closely packed together, into the box. This was 
repeated by him three or four times, and amounted to about one 
one hundred, and were for the Democratic candidates. 

Victor Gcrodias states on oath, that lie is a citizen of New Orleans, 
and that at the poll corner of Claiborne street and Bayou Road, when 
the commissioners were counting the ballots, several of them 
marked “ colored’’ were lying under the table, Commissioner Ne¬ 
ville dropped his handkerchief on a pile of some fifty or sixty bal¬ 
lots, marked “ colored,’’ and picking them up, put them in his 
pocket, and left the room. Witness said to one of the supervisors 
acting in behalf of the Republican party, “ That man is putting 
ballots in his pocket.’’ Whereupon said commissioner turned to a 
police officer, and said “ Arrest that man,’’ meaning witness. Wit¬ 
ness is positive that the tickets so gathered and pocketed by that 
commissioner were regular Republican tickets. 


84 


On Monday or Tuesday, April 20 or 21, 1808, Louis Curien, com¬ 
missioner of election at poll one, precinct thirteen, showed witness 
what he represented to be a copy of the tally list of the ballots cast 
at said poll, as the commissioners had counted them, according to 
said copy. E. Lemarie had received two hundred and seventy votes 
for State Tax Collector, and V. Gerodias had received two hundred 
and three, giving Lemarie a majority of sixty-seven votes. On the 
twenty-second (next day) said Curien told witness that he had 
copies from the tally lists of poll two, same precinct, showing for E. 
Lemarie two hundred and forty-eight votes, and for Y. Gerodias one 
hundred and sixty-two, giving to Lemarie a majority of 
eighty-six votes. Fifteen or twenty days after the election, 
witness had a conversation with one of the commissioners who 
acted at Poll 1, Precinct 13, and he confirmed what all those who 
had seen the original returns of that poll before they were trans¬ 
mitted to the Kegistrars, freely conceded, viz: that the Republican 
candidates had a clear majority of thirty-eight votes over their oppo¬ 
nents; there must have been a discrepancy in the return promulgated 
by the General commanding, as said return did not correspond with 
an original tally roll shown to witness by the said Curien two or 
three days after the election. 

At Poll No. 2, thirteenth precinct, sixth ward, on St. Philip 
street, witness saw the commissioners of election at that poll refuse 
the votes of two or three colored men whose papers were correct and 
who were entitled to vote. Witness knows these papers were correct 
for he examined them. In another instance, upon the refusal of the 
commissioners to receive the vote of a colored man, witness urged 
that his vote be received, his papers being correct, but the commis¬ 
sioners claimed that he did not state his residence right. Witness 
knew the man, and it was only after he had threatened to report the 
said commissioners that they finally concluded to take his vote. 
They kept his papers and sent a deputy sherilf, Mr. XJrtigue, with 
him, and found that his residence was correctly stated, and they 
returned to him his papers. 

Mr. Philip Montane, Mr. Lefevre and others told witness that 
Louis Prados, commissioner of election at poll No. 2, fourteenth 
precinct, sixth ward, corner Bayou road and Galvez streets, stuffed 
the ballot box at that poll. 

J, P. Lewis states on oath, that at poll No, 2, precinct No. ! 4 , on 


85 


Friday April, 17, 18G8, a deputy sheriff apparently by the leave of 
the commissioners of election was taking republican tickets out of 
the ballot box. 

Eugene Staes states on oath, that one of the commissioners of 
election at poll No. 1, precinct 14, stated on Sunday evening, April 
T9, 18G8, that the republican majority at that poll was thirty-eight. 
This statement was confirmed by the report of the supervisors of 
election. 

John Dennis states on oath, that during the election of the seven¬ 
teenth and and eighteenth of April 18G8, three men presented them¬ 
selves with their certificates of registration at poll No. 2, precinct 
14, to vote, but were refused by the commissioners and driven 
away; ten minutes afterward three Germans were introduced inside 
the poll room and allowed to vote. 

A. D. Young states on oath that he was a member of the committee 
appointed by the Republican party—by permission of the general 
commanding to witness the counting of votes, and, that at poll one, 
precinct fourteen, the counting of the ballots was nearly completed 
on Sunday, April 19, 1868, about ten o’clock P. M.; there wore lying 
on the table twenty-eight Republican tickets and ten Democratic, and 
scratched tickets yet uncounted. 

One of the commissioners said that as the tally lists, two in num¬ 
ber, did not agree, he would propose that they should make them 
agree ly dropping the tallies on one or the other. This proposition, 
however, was not agreed to. 

At said poll the total vote cast was six hundred and thirty-two or 
three, as reported by the commissioners of election. Of this number 
the tally list showed three hundred and fifty straight Republican 
tickets. The whole Republican vote at that poll according to the lists 
was about three hundred and seventy-eight, being about one hundred 
majority. 

William Neville states on oath that he was appointed a commis¬ 
sioner of election on the seventeenth and eighteenth days of April, 
1868, tyt poll one, precinct fourteen, sixth ward, by the registrars of 
that ward. 

Question. Do you recognize this gentleman (Mr. Tinchard) ? 

Answer. I do, sir. 

Question. State whether you remember having threatened him 
with imprisonment on the day of election? 


86 


Answer. I remember ordering him from the polls. I threatened 
to have him arrested if lie did not leave the poll. I did the same 
thing with others, I do not know how many others; I should judge 
two or three. The reason for my threatening this man was for 
making angry demonstrations, and disturbing the poll. 

Question. Now state what the angry demonstrations were ? 

Answer. I do not remember the circumstances, there being two or 
three of the same kind. 

Question. State what the disturbance or disturbing the peace of 
the poll was ? 

Answer. Well, blocking up the passage to the box, and refusing 
to leave when ordered. 

Question. How was he blocking up the passage to the box ? 

Answer. By continually occupying the space in front of the en¬ 
trance to the poll. 

Question. How long had he occupied the space in front of the 
entrance at that particular time? 

Answer. I do not remember exactly how long, but certainly half 
an hour. 

Question. State what he was asking from the commissioners of 
election ? 

Answer. I do not know, as he was there for any particular pur¬ 
pose. I do not know for what purpose he was there. 

Question. Did he make no statement of what his purpose was? 

Answer. I do not remember of his making any statement of what 
he was there for. 

Question. Do you mean to say that he stood there for half an hour 
without saying anything, merely for the purpose of obstructing the 
way to the poll ? 

Answer. No, he said a great deal. 

Question. State if Mr. Tincliard was not at that time conversing 
with one of the commissioners of election in regard to a vote which 
had been refused ? 

Answer. I do not remember of his conversing with a commissioner. 
Yes, he was talking with a commissioner of election. 

Question. Was he talking with reference to a vote which had been 
refused ? 

Answer. He might have been, I can’t say. 

Question. State whether you did not soon after receive from a 



Mr. Premaux the registration pipers of a third party without making 
any observations? 

Answer. To the best of my knowledge, I believe I did not. 

JohnP. Martin, states on oath, that on Sunday April 19, 1868, at 
poll one, precinct fourteen, one of the commissioners of. election 
liamed William Neville took from the ballot box a handfull of bal¬ 
lots which were marked “ colored” and prepared to put them in his 
pocket, but perceiving that persons were watching him he threw 
them on the table and mixed them with other papers; he acted in an 
anxious and embarrassed manner, and threw some of said tickets 
under the table and over the door. 

John G. Seldon, states on oath, that on Sunday, April 19, 18G8, 
at poll two, precinct fourteen, Mr. Prados one of the commissioners 
of election at said poll exhibited twenty-five or thirty certificates of 
registration on which he said that he had written the word “voted;” 
said certificates belonged to persons who had offered to vote at said 
precinct on the days of election, but the ballots of said persons were 
not deposited in the ballot box. 

August Lefevre, commissioner of election at poll No. 2, precinct 
No. 11, sixth ward, states on oath, that Mr. Prados commissioner 
of election at said poll did on the seventeenth day of April, 1868, 
in the presence of Captain Clement Laurent and witness, illegally 
and fraudulently stuffed the ballot box at said poll, against the will 
and consent of said Captain Laurent and witness; that said Prados 
did also on the eighteenth day of April, 1868, stuff the ballot box at 
said poll several times and that when said Captain Laurent and wit¬ 
ness protested against said fraudulent stuffing, and declared their 
intention to report the same, said Prados answered that he would 
take the responsibility upon himself in case of emergency, provided 
his (Prados’) brother was elected Alderman of the second district of 


New Orleans; that while Captain Laurent and witness were protest¬ 
ing against this stuffing of the ballot box, Prados said that he had 
saved our lives against the scorn and threats of the chief engineer of 
engine house No. 3, (at said poll) who took us for Black Eepublscans 
and would have driven us from the polls. Captain Laurent and 
witness finding the position so precarious submitted. 

At seven o’clock P. M., on Saturday, as the commissioners closed 
the polls, commissioner Prados’ brother with two other Democrats 
came inside the poll room and claimed the right to take the tally 


list; witness objected to him or any stranger coming in to in- 
terefere with the commissioners in the discharge of their duty, but 
commissioner Prados insisted on his brother taking charge of the 
tally list, and the two democrats before referred to proceeded to 
count the ballots and continued counting till about ten or eleven o’clock 
that night, when commissioner Prados called upon witness to take 
charge of the box. 

At three o’clock A. M., Sunday, the nineteenth, witness called on 
Captain Scott, Registrar for the sixth ward, to take his place for a 
few moments, which he did, and called the tickets in presence of two 
members of the Republican party, who remained until half past 
three or four o’clock Sunday morning, when they returned. At six 
o’clock Sunday morning, as witness entered the poll room, he saw 
commissioner Prados take a handful of Democratic tickets, well 
folded, and having “ colored’’ written on the back with lead pencil, 
and then and there substituted them for Republican ballots. At 
seven o’clock, A. M., same day, Captain Scott took possession of the 
ballot box in the presence of the representatives of the Republican 
party and proceeded to count the ballots, and while doing so three 
or four different parties (strangers) took possession of the tally list 
and tampered with it as they pleased. On seeing such gross injus¬ 
tice witness withdrew. 

According to the registration books and witness’ estimate of votes 
cast he believes the Republican candidates had a majority of about 
one hundred and fifty at said poll. 

Witness has been threatened by different parties that in case lie 
testified in the contested election cases they would have him “ in a 
bad fix.” 

Cross-Examination by H. J. Campbell. 

l r ou swore to certain facts before the Committee on Election; 
afterwards you made affidavits that you were induced so to do by 
certain parties for promises of reward, and that said facts were 
false. State now all that occurred in reference to this subject since 
the election. 

Answer. On the eighteenth day of April, 1868, the present year, 
the last day of election, as I was coming from my poll, sixth ward, 
second district, fourteenth precinct, poll No. 2, I was accosted by 


89 


different candidates, Republican and Democratic, inquiring from me 
what was the return of my poll. I told both parlies that they had 
the majority, in order to get rid of them. From thence I proceeded 
home, until the proclamation of General Buchanan, announcing 
the returns of said election, I met one candidate, Mr. Eugene Staes, 
in Exchange Alley, between Canal and Customhouse streets. He 
stopped me, and inquired from me if there was any fraud at my 
poll. I told him that I would not meddle with the affair; that I was 
a poor man and a business man, and would have nothing to do with 
politics. He pressed me so hard with promises that I told him yes, 
there was fraud; then I left him. I met him very often after that, 
until the proclamation convening the Legislature. Mr. Staes came 
• to my house at half past nine o’clock at night, in company with 
Messrs. Rigaud and Chevallier, and called me down and asked me 
if I wanted to testify, and give in writing what I had told him re¬ 
garding fraud. 1 told him the same as above stated, that I would 
not meddle with it. He told me that the Democratic party was 
dead, and that it was useless to depend upon them. I told him if I 
should do so it would create for me so many enemies that I could 
not earn a living again in this city, or probably I might receive 
some personal injury. He told me that the Republican party would 
protect me in every respect, and that I would have a situation and 
work; and that he knew I was a poor man and a man of family. 
He then told me he wanted me to give that testimony, in order to 
get two more Republican senators into the Senate, and by that X 
should have a situation in the Legislature. I did not know who 
were the contestants; did not know that there were any seats con¬ 
tested in the Senate until I testified in the case. 

A. Lefevre, being duly sworn, deposes and says, when Eugene 
Staes, Mr. Rigaud and Mr. Chevalier came to his house, and spoke 
to him in regard to the contested election pending before the Senate, 
lie was in the habit of drinking very freely, and his mind has been 
so imperiled by frequent difficulties, that he has said a great deal of 
nonsense, and his conduct has been very mischievous, not only in 
this matter but also in his own individual affairs; witness was con¬ 
stantly under the influence of liquor about this time. 

12 


90 

PARISH OF ORLEANS—NINTH WARD, 

C, Miller, a policeman, states on oath, that lie was ordered on 
duty at poll No. 2, precinct twenty-one, New Orleans, on Friday, the 
seventeenth day of April, 1803; that he saw Channey Bunce, chair¬ 
man of the board of commissioners of said poll, on that day, and 
said Bunce was so intoxicated as to be unfit to perform his duty 
correctly; that said Bunce spoke very roughly to colored men offer¬ 
ing to vote, and refused a great many who had their registration 
papers; that said Bunce closed the poll on Friday evening, the seven¬ 
teenth of April, 1868, at about ten minutes to seven o’clock, and 
that when deponent passed the next poll on the corner of Congress 
and Levee streets, the poll was open and the people were still voting. 

John Baptiste states on oath that he is a resident and duly quali¬ 
fied elector of the parish of Orleans, Louisiana; that he presented 
his certificate of registration, and tendered his vote at poll No. 2, 
precinct twenty-one, of said parish; was refused by the commission¬ 
ers of election at said poll; that by said refusal he was illegally de¬ 
prived of his right to vote. 

Thomas Briggs, colored, states on oath, that he is a resident of the 
parish of Orleans, and a duly qualified elector of the same; that on 
Saturday, April 18, 186S, he offered to vote at poll No. 2, precinct 
twenty-one; that the commissioners of election of said poll refused 
to allow him to do so, thereby depriving him of his lawful privilege. 

Antoine Roman states on oath, that he was a resident of St. Ber¬ 
nard parish; was duly qualified as an elector; that he offered to vote 
at polls No. 1 and 2 of the twenty-first precinct, in the city of New 
Orleans, having resided in said precinct two (2) months previous to 
the election, and was refused, thus depriving him of his legal right 
to vote. 

Fermin Metoyer, colored, states on oath, that he is a resident of 
New Orleans, Louisiana, and a duly registered voter at poll number 
two, precinct number twenty-one, tendered his certificate of registry 
and offered to vote; his certificate was taken from him by Mr. W. 
Bunce, commissioner of election, and his vote refused. 

William Cooper states on oath, that he is a registered voter and 
resident of the city of New Orleans; that he offered his vote ut the 
same time, showing his certificate of registry at polls one* and two, 
precinct twenty-one, and was rejected by the said commissioners. 

George Wallace being duly sworn, says that he is a resident of the 
city of New Orleans and a duly registered elector; that lie presented 



ers of election at poll No. 2, precinct No. 21, and was rejected with¬ 
out assigning any reason, afterwards lie presented a letter from Cap¬ 
tain De Bussey of General Buchanan’s staff, and was again refused 
to vote. 

Paul Clark, being duly sworn says, that he is a resident of the city 
of New Orleans and a duly registered voter of said city, and that he 
presented his certificate of registry and tendered his vote to the 
commissioners at poll two, precinct twenty-one of said city when 
said commissioners rejected his vote and detained his certificate of 
registry. 

Henry Jackson, being duly sworn, says that he is a registered 
voter of the parish of Orleans, ninth ward, and a resident of said 
ward; that ho presented his certificate of registration and tendered 
his vote to the commissioners of election at his voting poll in the 
ninth ward and his certificate taken from him and his vote rejected, 
and he was arrested and imprisoned. 

Simon Boss, being duly sworn, says that he is a resident of the city 
of New Orleans and duly registered elector therein; that he presented 
his certificate of registry and tendered his vote on Friday, April 17, 
1868, at poll number two, precinct number twenty-one and was re¬ 
fused his right to vote at said election. 

William Thompson being duly sworn, says that he is a resident of 
the city of New Orleans and a duly registered voter of the same; 
that he presented his certificate of registry and tendered his vote at 
poll two, precinct number twenty-one and was rejected. 


LIST OF NAMES OF PERSONS NOT ALLOWED TO VOTE, ETC. 

Statement of Joseph Klein and Others. 

Mr. Jeremiah Butler, residing at No. 203 New Levee street, went 

to precinct twenty-one, poll -, corner of Congress and Levee 

streets, and was not allowed to vote. 

Nicholas Nivas, residing on Moreau street, between Lesseps and 
France streets, presented himself at poll No. 2, precinct twenty-one, 
where they refused to allow him to exercise his privilege of voting, 
the commissioner falsely stating that Ill's surname (Nivas) was not 
on the registry paper. 

Charles Dolbert resides on Goodchildren street, between Piety and 
Louisa streets. At poll No. 1, precinct No. 20, engine house No. 24, 




ft 


ft 


92 

# 

on Greatmen street, had his registration paper taken from him by 
Commissioner Dolbear, and was sent to prison on Saturday, and 
remained there until the following Wednesday. 

Benjamin Simmonds lives at Madam John’s, about one mile below 
the station, near the Barracks. Has resided there two months. 
Went to poll two, precinct twenty-one, where his vote was refused, 
on the ground that he was registered in the First District. 

* John Monroe resides on Levee street, No. 288, between Lesseps 
and Poland streets. He presented himself at poll No. 2, corner of 
Independence and Levee streets, where they refused to allow him to 
vote, and the commissioners took from him his certificate of registra¬ 
tion. 

Michael Byrns, colored, had his papers taken away from him by 
Commissioner Dobert, at poll No. 2, twentieth precinct, for the rea¬ 
son that he was colored, and could have no such a name as Byrns. 

Thomas Behler and-Robin, both commissioners at the above 

poll, are witnesses. 

Michael Burns, residing at No. 807 Goodchildren street, between 
Piety and Desire streets, went to poll No. 1, precinct twenty, engine 
house on Greatmen street, where his registration paper was taken 
from him, and he was sent to prison on Friday, where he remained 
until the following Wednesday. He was arrested by order of Com¬ 
missioner Dolbert. 

Mr. Bunco, commissioner of election, at poll corner of Independ¬ 
ence and Levee streets, refused a number of times to allow Repub¬ 
licans to vote. A young man by the name of Cenas Stanley pre¬ 
sented his registration paper to him, which was refused on the plea 
that he was under age. Even after having procured an affidavit to 
the effect that he was of full age, he was refused, and ordered from 
the poll. Mr. Bunce also kept the registration papers of two men, 
and refused to return them, saying he would do so in the morning 
(SaturdayA While Democrats would be admitted to the polls, Re- 
publicans were refused. When from the Gentilly Road they could 
not vote under any circumstances, notwithstanding their registration 
papers were of that precinct and poll. Witness was ordered from 
the polls by Mr. Bunce, but declined to go. 

Henry Jackson was arrested at poll No. 1,' precinct No. 11, en¬ 
gine house No. 24, for not knowing the name of the street. 

Randall Jones has resided at No. 228 Lesseps street for five months; 



» 


93 

was registered in St. Bernard. His vote was refused with certifi¬ 
cate of registration and affidavit. 

George Ruffin has resided corner of Lesseps and Front Levee 
streets for the last three months, was registered in the parish of Or¬ 
leans (right hank), his vote was refused on presentation of his regis¬ 
tration paper and an affidavit at poll corner of Congress and Levee 
streets. 

Honore Andrews has resided at No. 223 Lesseps street, parish of 
Orleans for the last three months; was registered in St. Mary par¬ 
ish; at the poll on the corner of Independence and Levee streets he 
presented himself to vote with his certificate of registration and an 
affidavit, but was not allowed to do so. 

George Wallace was refused his right of voting at the corner of 
Independence and Levee streets; had his registration paper and affi¬ 
davit with him. The Board of Registrars when appealed to refused 
to order the commissioners to receive his vote; resided on Gentilly 
road in the parish of Orleans. 

John Jenkins was refused his right to vote at poll corner of Inde¬ 
pendence and Levee streets, because he was registered in the parish 
of Orleans (right bank). 

James Butler was refused his right to vote at poll No. 1, precinct 
No. 21, ninth ward, because his affidavit was made before a notary 
public. 


New Orleans, La., April 21, 18G8. 

\ 

' S. B. Packard, Esq., Chairman Board of Registration: 

Sir —In obedience to instructions, I hereby transmit my report 
relative to the manner in which the election has been conducted in 
the ninth ward, of which I am the supervisor, to-wit: 

First —In every instance where colored voters were registered as 
living on Gentilly road, although in the parish of Orleans, they were 
refused to cast their ballots of which there are a great number. 

Second —Colored voters were refused to cast their ballots in the 
precinct because they had moved to another precinct. 

Third —Republican ballots offered by colored voters were changed 
into Democratic ballots previous to placing them into poll box. 

Fourth _Parties who were known to vote the Democratic ticket 

were allowed to vote without producing either their registration cer- 


tificatc or affidavit, nor did the commissioners refer to the poll books 
in such instances. 

Fifth —Many colored vovers were refused the privilege of voting, 
and their registration certificates taken from them for no satisfactory 
cause whatever, and others were confused by putting frivolous ques¬ 
tions to them in order to prevent them from voting. 

All of which can be substantiated. 

Respectfully submitted, 

(Signed) JOSEPH KLEIN, 

Supervisor Ninth Ward, Parish of Orleans. 


B. H. Lynch, supervisor of election in the ninth ward, appointed 
by the board of registration, reports as follows : 

The commissioners of election appointed for the ninth ward by the 
democratic party used every means in their power to defeat the re¬ 
publican party by frauds and unfair means. J. J. Gugenbut, chair¬ 
man of the board of commissioners at poll No. 1, precinct 21, did, 
while attending to the duties of commisfioner of election, have in 
one hand a quantity of democratic tickets which he substituted for 
republican tickets every opportunity. 


PARISH OF ORLEANS—TENTH WARD. 

James H. Riley states, on oath, that he voted at Poll No. 2, Pre¬ 
cinct No. 22, tenth ward, Second Congressional District, the 
straight Radical Republican ticket. He made no erasure on his 
ticket; he did not stay long enough to get much information, but he 
found strong prejudices against the negroes and the Republican 
ticket at the poll; witness was doing duty as an officer; knows that 
that there was some five hundred and six (50G) colored men lost 
their registration certificates and produced affidavits that they resi¬ 
ded in that district long enough to entitle them to a vote, but the 
commissioners rejected their votes, setting forth that their affidavits 
were fraudulent; witness saw them take up their Republican tickets 
and offer to vote them; they were the straight Republican tickets, 
on which the name of Simon Jones was a candidate for Congress. 

During the election at that poll, he found persons with bunches 
of bogus Republican tickets, which they tried to substitute for the 



genuine tickets to the colored voters. Witness States that he inters 
fered and tried to prevent this as much as he could at that poll. 
Several parties tried to prevent him from interfering with them. 
He saw no violence, but lie saw them trying to intimidate the col¬ 
ored voters and those who were advocating’ the success of the Re- 
publican ticket. The principal commissioner of election at that poll 
was Col. Von Zink.en, and the majority of them were Democratic. 
Col. Von Zinken was a colonel in the Confederate army. He ap¬ 
peared to be the leading commissioner at that poll. The commis¬ 
sioners were nearly three days counting the votes; and during that 
time, many of the persons that were there as witnesses to the count¬ 
ing, fell asleep, and were greatly under the influence of liquor. 
Witness says that if he had been one of the commissioners, he would 
have had ample opportunity to commit fraud; did not see any him¬ 
self. On the first day, the colored voters were in the majority; but 
on the second day, the white voters were in the majority. 

Win. H. Bunough states on oath, that he resides in the Fourth 
District, city of New Orleans, and in the Second Congressional Dis¬ 
trict; that he voted at the poll corner of Apollo and Fourth streets; 
was clerk of the Board of Registrars in the tenth ward, Second Con¬ 
gressional Distriat in 1867, was chief clerk for the Board of Regis¬ 
trars appointed under orders of General Sheridan; John L. Davis 
was chairman of the said Board of Registrars, there were some four 
thousand (4000) voters registered, and some one hundred and 
seventy (170) or one huudred and eighty (180) persons rejected 
who had applied for registration, as being ineligible or disqualified 
under the reconstruction acts of Congress. 

He was also clerk of registration office in the tenth ward appointed 
under General Hancock’s orders, from the commencement of the 
registration until the close; during that time there w r ere thirty-three 
(33) of the aforesaid rejected and disqualified voters accepted and 
registered. The reasons for the disqualifications in 1867 were as 
follows; viz : Sixteen (16) of the said number were foreigners, who 
had been in the Confederate army and who had received their natu¬ 
ralization papers since the close of the war. Four (4) were foreign¬ 
ers who had claimed protection during the rebellion as such, and 
who were since naturalized in the district court prior to last 
election. Thirteen (13) of them had held office and afterwards en¬ 
gaged in the rebellion. 


There were also nine (9) who were foreigners, and claimed to be 
citizens of the United States by making affidavits to the same in 
another court, and upon the representation that their fathers had 
been naturalized citizens of the United States, they being minors at 
the time of said naturalization ; was clerk at the office of Board of 
Registrars at the time of the counting of ballots of poll No. 2, pre¬ 
cinct No. twenty-two, tenth ward. There were ninety-four (94) 
straight colored Republican tickets, four (4) straight white Republi¬ 
can tickets, and fifty-six (56) split white Republican tickets; one hun¬ 
dred and thirty-nine (139) split wdiite Democratic tickets, and three 
hundred and nine (309) straight white Democratic tickets, making a 
total vote of six hundred and two (602.) The box was opened by 
the chairman of said Board of Registrars, who assisted witness in 
counting the ballots ; while doing so they received official orders 
from General Buchanan to cease counting the ballots ; this was one 
or two o’clock in the evening, on the succeeding Monday following 
the election. The boxes were then sealed by the witness and regis¬ 
trars, and were sent to Dr. Green’s house, who was one of the said 
registrars, where they remained some fifteen (15) days, until orders 
were received to deliver the same to the sheriff’s office. 

Witness says there were some fifteen or twenty (15 or 20) colored 
men refused registration, who, in his opinion, w r ere entitled to regis¬ 
ter and vote. The refusals were upon various grounds, viz: Such 
as the registrars judged to be under age, and those whose state¬ 
ments they doubted as to their place of residence. 

Witness says there were some eight or ten (8 or 10) colored men 
stricken from the rolls or register book after they had been regis¬ 
tered, giving as a reason for so doing that, upon inquiry by a police 
officer, they were not found at their residence as stated. Witness 
says that if the police officer had made the said inquiry in citizens’ 
dress, he would have found more of them; but being in uniform, it 
intimidates them. Witness believes that the officer’s name who 
made these inquiries is St. Clair. Witness is a Radical, and believes 
St. Clair is one also. 

Witness says that he cannot state the reason why those men who 
were refused registration in 1867 were allowed to vote or register in 
1868. Witness asked the chairman his reasons for registering these 
disqualified men; he replied that “he would not refuse to register 
any white man, and then register a negro.” He does not know the 



Democrats; he has a personal acquaintance with some, but knwos 
the names of all of them. They are as follows, viz: 


Charles F. Clerc, 
John Connoly, 

John B. Housner, 
Andrew Mangold, 
Augustus Meyer, 
John Muller, 

James M. Glen nan, 
William Miller, 
John Nesborrough, 
John Iiyal, 

A. Gannett, 

D. A. Harris, 

M. M. Dowler, 

P. A. Skip with, 

C. C. Delacroix, 


John Reynolds, 
John Sheil, 

Charles Steidinger, 
John Walsh, 

John H. Ellenhush, 
Pincus Goldstein, 
Max. Hamhacker, 
John Montgomery, 
William Woelper, 
John A. Watkins, 
Harry T. Hays, 
Pat. D. Collins, 
Francis Laner, 

B. W. Casson, 

G. W. Dirmeyer, 


W. xA. Douty. 


Witness states that he is of opinion that the Board of Registrars 
in this Ward were Democrats. One of them was an ex-officer of 
the United States army. 

William B. Gray states, on oath, that he resides at No. 947 
Tchoupitoulas street, city of New Orleans; that he voted at Poll No. 
1, Precinct No. 22, Tenth Ward, Second Congressional District 
He voted the straight Republican ticket; he was at the polls several 
times during the election; says that the commissioners asked a 
number of useless questions, and sent men to vote at other polls 
when they were entitled to vote at this poll; these were colored men; 
this was of frequent occurrence in the Fourth District, as witness 
was traveling from poll to poll during the election. Colored men 
from the country parishes who presented certificates of registration 
in their respective parishes w*erc ready and willing to make oath 
that they had resided in the city ten (10) days prior to the election, 
and were refused the right to vote; some were refused who had 
produced affidavits to the commissioners that they had so resided, 
etc. Witness states that he was at Poll 3, Precinct No, 22, corner 
of Dryades and Philip streets, and examined the tally sheets, and 
found that there was an error of one hundred (100) or more votes in 


13 


I 


98 

respect to Gray and Bacon, that is, between one sheet and the other; 
he could not tell whether it run through the whole, but is of the 
opinion that it did; if so, it would give Colonel Mann one hundred 
(100) votes more than he was entitled to; it had the appearance 
that there was such a discrepancy; the appearance of the two tally 
sheets indicated that there was that difference through the whole 
list of Republican candidates; this was brought to witness’ notice by 
the fact that the number of votes were nearly equal between the 
Republican and Democratic votes, as the sheets were; these numbers 
had not been added at the registration of Tenth Ward. Witness 
acted as supervisor by appointment of Mr. Packard, and was at the 
registration office during a greater part of two days; while he was 
there several colored men applied for registration that w r ere unlaw¬ 
fully refused, in his opinion; some were refused for the reason, as 
the registrars expressed it, that the applicants were not of age, and 
they were unwilling to receive the affidavit of the applicant or his 
friends to the effect that he was of age; they were asked a great 
number of useless questions regarding their intentions, of which 
ticket they would vote, and were put off with the plea that the reg¬ 
istrars did not believe that they resided at the place they mentioned, 
but took the names of the applicants, saying they would send some 
one to see if they did live there, telling them to call again next 
week, when, if every thing was all right, they would register them; 
I give this as an instance of many means that were used to prevent 
the colored men from registering; one of these men witness took to 
Judge Giffin where he made affidavit, and upon its presentation he 
was refused the right to register; this affidavit was in regard to his 
age. It is witness’ opinion that if these colored men had been 
allowed to register, they would all have voted the Republican ticket 
on which was Simon Jones for Congress. 

Witness thinks that if a fair and impartial vote had been had in 
the Fourth District—that is, the Eleventh Ward would have given 
small Democratic majority, enough to counterbalance a majority for 
the Republicans in the Tenth Ward. Thinks the majority in the 
fourth district would be democratic about one hundred (100) ma¬ 
jority. Witness thinks that if a fair and impartial registration ha 
been had in the first district of this city, it would show a republican 
majority of two thousand (2000) voters. 

Wm. Douglas states on oath that he has been a resident of the 


99 


V 


city of New Orleans about twenty-two (22) years; lives in the third 
district, is a registered voter; held the position of sergeant of police 
in the Fourth District, and was on duty during the election of the 
seventeenth and eighteenth of April 1868; he was detailed for duty 
and placed at engine house No. 22, tenth ward, Second Congressional 
Distiict ; was there both days of the election, and occasionally 
visited different polls in the tenth ward. At twenty-two’s engine 
house, tenth ward, saw colored men present themselves at that poll 
to vote, and were sent to the poll corner of Philip and Dryades 
streets. The commissioner at that poll, by the name of Costley, is 
the one who directed them, and stated that they had no right to 
vote. In the two days there could not have been less than twenty- 
five or thirty (25 or 30) of these men, and probably more ; witness 
looked at their papers, and found they were entitled to vote at this 
poll ; the commissioner, Costley, examined the papers with the wit¬ 
ness ; twenty-five (25) of those who were turned away showed wit¬ 
ness their tickets, and they were straight Republican tickets, on 
which was the name of Simon Jones for Congress ; the tickets were 
not scratched ; witness saw persons take the tickets out of the 
hands of freedmen, making them believe they had the Democratic 
ticket : he knows of instances where the spurious Republican tickets 
were circulated with the Democratic candidates thereon; this coun¬ 
terfeit or bogus ticket had at the head “ Republican” and “against 
the constitution.’’ It had a likeness on it the same as the Republi¬ 
can ticket; the likeness was of A. Lincoln; the ticket had the Demo- 
1 cratic candidates on from Taliaferro down ; these tickets were in the 
hands of those parties who were working and acting in the Demo¬ 
cratic party ; these tickets were circulated principally among the 
colored men; several were deceived and voted this bogus ticket. 
Witness thinks from twelve to twenty (12 to 20) were deceived, and 
voted these bogus tickets; he was shown the same kind of bogus 
tickets at other polls in that ward; he thinks there was unnecessary 
delay in keeping colored men from voting; improper questions were 
asked the colored men, as witness considered, in regard to the 
right of voting, producing, as witness thinks, unnecessary delay. 
There was no delay in regard to the white voters—where they voted 
the Democratic ticket, it was received promptly. 

There were persons that he took to be working in the interest of 
the Democratic party, trying to deceive the colored voters, per- 


100 


suading them that they had the wrong ticket. Would know some 
of these colored men who were obstructed or hindered from the 
right of voting. The colored men who came to that poll behaved 
properly and tried to vote peaceably, and left after doing so. 

Witness only saw two commissioners at 22’s engine house. One 
of them was Costly; the other was Banky. Banky acted as clerk 
and the other received the votes and put them in the ballot box. 
It was about five or six feet from where the voters stood. Was at 
this poll both days of election. When the polls closed, the commis¬ 
sioners and deputy sheriff took charge of the poll box and brought 
it to the police station. It was sealed at the polling place. 

Witness believes that the Republicans, colored and white, at this 
poll were in the majority. He forms his opinion from what came 
under his noHce during both days of election; and had the election 
been a fair one, there would have been a Republican majority. He 
saw no one of the Republican party interfere with the voting of the 
Democratic ticket. Witness states that he voted for the adoption of 
the Constitution and the Republican ticket, and did nothing on the 
days of the election that was inconsistent with his duty as an officer. 

William Weber states on oath that he was at the poll, corner of 
Philip and Dryades streets, and while there a party in the interest 
of the Democratic party remarked to him, “Hang the damned nig¬ 
ger.'’ He also heard others say to the colored men, that if they 
voted the Radical ticket they would discharge them. Witness was 
a candidate for Recorder in the Fourth District. From the knowl¬ 
edge witness has of the different political parties in the Fourth 
District, he believes the Radical Republican party w r ould have been 
successful if the election had been fairly conducted. There were 
four voting places in the tenth ward; witness was at all the voting- 
places during the two days of election; knows of no intimidation, 
except at the poll, corner of Philip and Dryades streets, where he 

% 

was assaulted with violence by forty or fifty (40 or 50) men, who 
were in the interest of the Democratic.party, and only escaped from 
them by jumping into his carriage. The names oi two of the party 
are Thomas Woelper and a Mr. Phelps, who shouted, “Kill the nig¬ 
ger.’’ Witness did not see arms; did not see any colored men 
driven from the polls. The above attack was on the second day of 
the election. Witness saw a great many bogus or counterfeit Re¬ 
publican tickets in circulation; they were in the hands of the Dem- 


101 


ocratic party. Witness has resided in the tenth ward of this city 
since 1847; does not know of persons being rejected as voters; wit¬ 
ness was one of those placed inside at voting poll No. 2, precinct 
No. 22, during the counting of the votes, by arrangement of the two 
different parties, for the purpose of seeing* that it was fairly con¬ 
ducted; witness had often served as a commissioner at previous 
elections, but never saw commissioners conduct themselves in the 
manner they did; witness says they took the tickets out of the box 

* and placed them on their knees, in bunches of ten and twenty, 

Democratic and Republican, without reading off the names of the 
candidates on the tickets, but called them off as so many straight 
tickets. Witness says that in looking over one of the straight 
Democratic tickets he found his name thereon for Recorder, and 
called the attention of the commissioners to the fact, and thus had 
it corrected. This occurred on Sunday morning, after having been 
up all night. One Yon Zinken, formerly a colonel in the Confede¬ 
rate arm}*, came in during the morning, and called one of the com¬ 
missioners, named Joseph Costley, to him, and had a short private 
consultation with him, after which Costley turned towards witness 
and told him to leave the house; then taking hold of witness’ arm, 
told him he could not stay there, as Colonel Yon Zinken said so. 

Witness knew of nineteen voters who voted the Radical Republi¬ 
can tickets without scratching therefrom any name; these were all 
white men, and they voted at poll No. 2, precinct No. 22, tenth ward, 
Second Congressional District, 

> 

Cross-Exam i nation. 


Witness saw each one of the nineteen (19) men referred to cast 
their votes; knows them all personally; their names are Charles Par¬ 
ish, Timothy O’Brien, Henry Winks, N. L. Torry, M. Seither, Jr., M. 
Seither, Sr., Daniel Whalen, Patrick Walsh, John C. Stacker, E. J. 
Nelson, James Riley, William Weber, N. Whiting, D. Penero, George 
Schantz, D. Mackay, Patrick McKay, R. W. Stanley and Lawrence 
Morrisy. Witness had said or done nothing when Woelper took hold 
of him and called him a damned nigger; knows of no reason why he 
was attacked, except that he was a Radical Republican. Forty or 
fifty (40 or 50) were standing in line; there were four or five (4 or 5) 
negroes to one white man; the majority of them were Republicans, 


102 


and were in possession of the polls; knows of no colored man voting 
the Democratic ticket by reason of threats referred to; does not know 
of any orders from General Buchanan that candidates were not al- ♦ 
lowed inside; witness was sent there by one Parker of the Republi¬ 
can party. 

Edward Nelson states on oath that lie resides on the corner of 
Annunciation and Philip streets, city of New Orleans; has been on 
the police force about thirteen (13) months; is a registered voter at 
poll No. 2, precinct No. 22, tenth ward, Second Congressional Dis¬ 
trict; voted the Republican ticket and saw it put in the box; saw a 
good deal of swindling at this poll; witness was an officer detailed 
at this poll by the lieutenant of the police in this district; his in¬ 
structions were, not to interfere with the election; saw affidavits 
brought to the polls by the Democratic party which were signed by 
the different judges or justices of the peace; these affidavits were 
voted on. Witness knew that the parties who presented these affi¬ 
davits were not entitled to vote, because sheriff Avery told him they 
were not to receive affidavits; witness saw one of these affidavits 
tom up after the vote had been received on it; at this poll witness 
saw negroes who were told by Democrats,that if they voted the Re¬ 
publican ticket they would be hung next day; some four or five 
(4 or 5) went away but don’t know whether they returned again or 
not; on the second day of the election witness saw the counterfeit 
Republican tickets there, and tickets from other districts in the 
hands of the Democratic party, who had general possession of the 
polls during the second day; witness says these tickets were placed 
in the hands of some twenty or thirty (20 or 30) colored men to 
vote, but cannot tell whether they voted them or not; saw some of 
the tickets from other wards in the box; saw some of the Democrats 
obstruct the negroes from voting by keeping them back from tie 
polls, this occurred on the last day of the election; witness was at 
the polls nearly all the time during the election; the white men pre¬ 
ponderated over that of the colored men; was at the polls at night 
while the votes were being counted, and saw some very strange pro¬ 
ceedings; the commissioners would take about twenty (20) tickets 
from the box, then separate the Democratic from the Republican 
and throw the Republican ticket back into the box. The commis¬ 
sioners did not read the names of the candidates on thes$ tickets, 
but called them so many straight tickets. During the night they 


103 

did not agree in their count; the difference was between two of the 
commissioners; two of them were Democrats and the third was a 
Republican. 

Stephen Danenhauer states on oath, that he resides at No. 715| 
Tchoupitoulas street, in the Fourth District of this city, and in the 
Tenth Ward, Second Congressional District; i3 twenty-four years of 
age; is a registered voter, and voted at the last election; voted the 
Republican ticket; was at poll No. 2, precinct No. 22. Witness saw 
while there one William Wibel take two colored men by the arm 
and make them vote the Democratic ticket. 

William Hall, a canvasser, had, previous to this, presented to 
these colored men Republican tickets, telling them they were the 
tickets they wanted to vote. Wibel then took hold of them and told 
them not to listen to Hall, that he knew nothing about it; then 
pulling them up to the poll, made them vote the Democratic ticket. 

Witness saw the Democrats cut off that portion of the Republican 
tickets that contained the vignette of Abraham Lincoln, and paste 
it on the Democratic tickets. Did not see any of them voted or cir¬ 
culated in the hands of the negroes. Witness saw no violence at 
that poll ; saw no Democrats hinder or obstruct any of the voters 
from voting. 

Witness was placed inside as a representative of the Republican 
party to watch the counting of the votes. 

Witness corroborates the testimony of Mr. Weber and Mr. Nel¬ 
son in reference to the counting of the ballots. Saw Mr. Weber 
turned out of the poll, as was stated by Weber. 

Mr. Parker, of the Republican office, appointed witness to watch 
the polls. Witness had no bets on the election. Does not belong 
to the Loyal League. 


SUMMARY. 

Election of April 17 and 18, 1868 .—Parish of Orleans. 


WARDS. 

1 

Republicans unjustly re¬ 
jected and intimidated. 

' 

Substitution of Democrat¬ 

ic for Republican ballots. 

1 

Illegal voting and stuf¬ 

fing. 

Fraudulent tallies. 

Republicans prevented 

from voting. 

Republican tickets taken 

from ballot box and de¬ 

stroyed. 

Republicans refused reg¬ 

istration. 

First . 

420 

32 





2 

Mpr-rmrl .i 

277 

2 

125 





Third .II 414 

2 






.: 

Fourth . 

44 

1 

ii 


75 



Fifth .| 

G 

0 






Sixth . 

43 

28G 

208 

205 


GO 


Ninth .•. 

100 

0 






Tenth. 

50G 

20 





28 



| 






Total.i 

1810 

343 1 

344 

295 

75 

GO 

30 


Grand total . 295' 


AGGREGATES. 


First. 454 

Second. 404 

Third. 416 

Fourth. 131 

Fifth. 6 

Sixth. 892 

Ninth. 100 

Tenth.,. 554 


2957 

William Walsh, states on oath that he is chief deputy sheriff in the 
office of sheriff of civil courts. The ballot boxes were placed in 
charge of the late sheriff, Dr. Avery. Witness has no certain knowl¬ 
edge of any transfer from Sheriff Avery to his successor, Sheriff 
Maxwell. Witness was deputy sheriff under Sheriff' Avery, at the 
time the boxes were received; he receipted for some of them; they 
were placed in a small room, immediately adjoining the office, in the 
some building with the civil courts. Does not know who had personal 
charge of the boxes since their receipt by the sheriff. M. d’Armas, 
a deputy, had possession of the key of that room; he had always had 








































































it previous to the reception of the boxes, and thinks lie has had it 
since. 

These boxes were subsequently examined by order of court, in the 
contested case ol Leaumont vs. Yiavant. Since then no one has 
distuibed the boxes to witness knowledge. M/r. Imcas, the present 
court house keeper, has general charge of the whole building. Wit¬ 
ness saw no records or papers delivered to Sheriff Avery, except such 
as might have been in the boxes. He believes that the room is kept 
locked, and that M. d’Armas, deputy sheriff, has charge of the key. 

Michel d’Armas, a deputy sheriff, states on oath that he has been 
a deputy sheriff for the last twenty-eight years, and still retains that 
position. The ballot boxes were received by Sheriff Avery, in com¬ 
pliance with an order from General Buchanan, in order to keep them 
in a safe place. Mr. d’Armas was called upon to keep them in a 
small room adjoining the office in which he kept old and valuable 
records of the office; he has afways had charge of the key of this 
room; it has been kept in the Sheriff’s safe. Witness objected to 
having the boxes stored there, as it was an inconvenience, and was 
not a very safe place, the rear window of said room being easy of 
access; the room, however, could not have been entered in the day 
time without its being noticed, or without great risk. When the 
boxes were deposited there witness delivered the key to Jules Sora- 
puru, a deputy sheriff, who was appointed by Dr. Avery to take 
charge of said boxes. 

Mr. W. Walsh was chief deputy sheriff during the absence of 
Sheriff Maxwell. 

Jules Sorapuru, deputy sheriff, states on oath, that he was a deputy 
sheriff, under Sheriff Avery. The ballot boxes were brought to the 
sheriff’s office, some fifteen or twenty days subsequent to the election, 
and he heard they were afterward placed in a room for safe keeping. 
Witness has no doubt that these boxes were kept safely by Sheriff 
Avery, and that they were not interfered with by any unauthorized 
persons. Some of the boxes were broken when brought to the 
sheriff’s office, and many of them were in bad order. An order was 
given by the Sixth District Court to give access to Messrs. Leaumont 
and Yiavant to the ballot boxes, on account of their contested election. 
Witness had nothing to do with the recounting of the ballots, but 
saw the pesons appointed counting them. 

Gustave Tournade states on oath, that he is a deputy sheriff, and 
was acting in that capacity under Sheriff Avery. He had nothing 
to do with the election of April 17 and 18, 1868. 

14 


A suit was brought in the Sixth District Court by Judge Leatb 


mont, contesting the election of Judge Viavant to the judgeship of 
the Fifth District Court. The Court appointed two persons to re¬ 
count the ballots and report the result. Dr. Avery, then sheriff, ap¬ 
pointed witness to assist as deputy sheriff in this recount of the 
ballots, and gave to him the key of the room in which the ballot 
boxes were kept: 

In the presence of both said persons, witness opened the room. 

t 

One of them, after examining some of the boxes, and finding them in 
bad order, protested against the counting in behalf of Judge Via¬ 
vant, whom he represented. He did not present himself again dur¬ 
ing the counting of the ballots. Mr. DuBuisson, the other person 
appointed, counted until it w r as completed. Some of the boxes were 
sealed properly and in good order. Many were only partially sealed, 
and in many instances the seal upon the keyhole was perforated, ap¬ 
parently with a key. Some of the keys were attached to the boxes, 

a 

but most of them were kept in a bunch as they were brought to 
the sheriff’s office. These boxes were put in the room where they 
had been kept by the sheriff. The room is always locked and the 
key kept in the sheriff’s safe. 

Some of the boxes contained the poll books and the tally lists? 
and others contained only the tally lists and the ballots. Four of 
the boxes were entirely empty. All the boxes examined by the per¬ 
sons appointed to recount were used at the late election. None of 
the boxes contained the oaths of the commissioners of election. 

After the recount was completed, Mr. Tournado returned all the 
boxes to the room above mentioned, locked the door, and returned 
the key to Mr. Hart, treasurer and deputy sheriff. He kept this 
key in the sheriff’s safe. 

Witness does not know who remitted the boxes to the sheriff. 
He believes they have been in charge of Sheriff Avery from the time 
of the promulgation of the order announcing the result of the elec¬ 
tion up to the time that they w r ere turned over to his successor in 
office, Mr. Maxwell, who is now civil sheriff of the parish of Orleans. 

Witness knows nothing further in relation to the boxes. After 
the recount was finished, witness locked the room, all the boxes 
being in it, and gave the key to Mr. Hart, treasurer under Sheriff 
Avery, who locked the key in the safe, as witness believes. 

Witness received the key from the hands of Mr. Hart at the com- 


107 


mencement of the recount, and every day during the same; at the 
close of each day’s count, he gave the key to Mr. Hart. 

Edward S. Wurzburger states on oath that at the time of the 
election of April 17 and 18, 1868, he was chief Deputy Sheriff under 
Sheriff Avery; is now Sheriff* of the criminal court; is aware of the 
order of the commanding general of the Fifth Military District to turn 
over the ballot boxes to the sheriff, having seen said order, which 
also provided that the poll books be turned over to two of the regis¬ 
trars; deponent is not positive that it was the poll books exactly, 
but it was a portion of the records appertaining to the election. 

Several days after the publication of said order, the ballot boxes 
were brought to the sheriff’s office; deponent immediately acquaint¬ 
ed Sheriff Avery of the fact, declining to receive them himself, as he 
had been a candidate at said election. Deponent advised Sheriff 
Avery to designate two deputies specially to receive them and know 
their condition, so far as could be ascertained from their outside 
appearance, and safely keep them, allowing no one to have access to 
them. 

From the time said boxes commenced to come in, several weeks 
elapsed before they were all received. He thinks the last to be re¬ 
ceived were from the seventh ward. The first lot were brought by 
Mr. Jenkins, one of the registrars of the fourth ward; deponent 
thinks they were brought before the order above referred to was 
promulgated; these were not receipted for until said order had been 
received. During the receipt of the boxes, one of the deputy sher- 
’ iffs called deponent’s attention to the fact that some of the said 
boxes were not in good order. Deponent referred him to Sheriff 
Avery, who who ordered all the boxes to be locked up in a room 
adjoining the office. Deponent knew nothing of said boxes after¬ 
ward, from personal knowledge. 

When the recount was ordered in the contested case of Leamont 
vs. Yiavant, Mr. Tournade, a deputy sheriff, was appointed to super¬ 
intend the recount in his official capacity. Mr. Tournade reported 
to deponent, in his official capacity, that four boxes, being those 
from the sixth ward, thirteenth and fourteenth precincts, contained 
neither ballots nor the evidence of returns.; that other ballot boxes 
had perforated key holes and broken lids, and that very few, compara- 
tivety, contained either poll lists, vote lists or other documents 
usually returned to the sheriff' after elections. Deponent has not 
seen the boxes since they were received by the sheriff. 


\ 


108 


Deputy sheriffs McNeil and Harrison receipted for the said boxes, 

pending the examination or recounting of votes; the key to the room 

% 

in which said boxes were kept was in the sheriff’s safe, and those 
appointed to recount the votes in said contested case of Leamont vs. 
Viavant called for and returned said key, to deponent’s knowledge, 
on the first of July, 18G8. 

Sheriff Avery transferred all his records to his successor, Mr. Max¬ 
well, including the ballot boxes, to the best of deponent’s know¬ 
ledge; he noticed on the next day, as he passed the court-house, a 
padlock on the door to said room, which had not been there the day 
previous. M. d’Armas is the deputy sheriff, who knows of the con¬ 
tents of said room; from the position of his desk in the office, and the 
long time that he is there daily at the office, M. d’Armas could best 
tell who went in and out of said room. 

Deponent does not know where the said boxes are now, but has 
reason to believe they are there still; if they are there now, they are 
in the custody of Sheriff Maxwell. Deponent thinks Mr. d’Armas 
or Mr. Dick, probably, have the key now, as they are the principal 
deputy sheriffs in Mr. Maxwell’s office. Said room was not guarded 
in any particular manner, but deponent considered it very safe; it 
was kept locked, and it w r as almost impossible for any one to break 
in without being noticed, unless the courthouse keeper was derelict 
in his duty. Mr. Leblanc, the former courthouse keeper, was re¬ 
cently succeeded by Mr. Lucas—about the first of July. 

Deponent further states that although he had for many years past 
mainly conducted elections and returns thereof, in his capacity as 
chief deputy, he took no part whatever in his official capacity in the 
appointing of special deputies, or in the election. Sheriff Avery ap¬ 
pointed a large number of deputy sheriffs; deponent knew very few 
of these personally. Deputy Sheriffs McNeil and Harrison made out 
their appointment and order to draw their certificate for pay. 

Deponent had very little conversation with Sheriff Avery on the 
subject of the election, said Avery having been a candidate for 
sheriff' of civil courts, previous to which deponent received the 
nomination in a convention for the position lie now holds. Deponent 
believes that these said deputies were paid at military headquarters; 
he did not see any receive pay at the sheriff’s office, and from his 
knowledge of the routine of the office he would have known had 
they been paid there ; he believes that the expenses of the election 
were paid from United States funds by order of General Buchanan. 


109 


New Orleans, August 15, 18(38. 

Judge C. Leaumont states, on oath, that he was a candidate for 
Judge of the Fifth District Court of New Orleans at the election of 
the seventeenth and eighteenth of April, 18G8; that, according to 
returns of election, (from headquarters Fifth Military District), now 
on file in the office of the Secretary of State, his opponent received 
twelve (12) votes majority, being the difference between 14,355 and 
14,367. 

Witness being firmly convinced that the Republican party in the 
parish of Orleans had voted unanimously for him, and that he had 
received fully two thousand votes of the intelligent class of the Dem- 
cratic party, addressed a communication to General Buchanan con¬ 
taining those statements, with a request to have the ballots again 
counted, but failing in this, he applied by preliminary petition to the 

Sixth District Court of New Orleans to have the ballots counted 

% 

again, duly notifying his opponent of the order of that Court, 

Witness requested the court to appoint a Democrat in whose 
honesty and integrity he could fully rely, to count the ballots. The 
court appointed A. A. Dubuisson, who counted the ballots, and the 
count showed that witness was elected by a majority of two hun¬ 
dred and three (203) votes, having received 14,826, while his oppo¬ 
nent, Judge Yiavant, only received 14,623. 

The counting of the ballots began on Monday, the eighth day of 
June, 1868, at ten A. M., and the returns were filed in court on 
Saturday, June 27, 1868. 

Judge Yiavant and a friend of his, and Gustave Tournaud, dep¬ 
uty sheriff, were present the first day of the count. 

Judge Yiavant came the second day, but withdrew and his friend 
remained. 

The third day, witness was not certain, but believes the friend of 
Judge Yiavant came, but withdrew at the instance of said judge, 
and believes after that time neither of them came, holding, as wit¬ 
ness supposed, from what had been told him, that the returns of the 
General were conclusive and could not be contradicted. 

All Ihe Republican tickets polled in the parish of Orleans at the 
aforesaid election, except one, had on them witness’ name as candi¬ 
date for Judge of the Fifth District Court; his other votes were 
Democratic, the name of his opponent being erased from the tickets 
and his name inserted in its stead. There were, to the best of wit¬ 
ness’ recollection, six (6) empty ballot boxes from the Sixth Ward,, 
and he was compelled to assume, for the purposes of the count, that 


no 


the returns made from those boxes to headquarters were correct. It 
is mere presumption or opinion on the part of witness that the dif¬ 
ference found in counting the votes resulted from the counting of 
the Democratic scratched tickets as straight ones by the commis¬ 
sioners. 

In the ballot boxes of the parish of Orleans, there were forty-two 
Democratic tickets, with counterfeit vignettes of the Republican 
ticket. Most of these were marked colored or black. 

"When the ballots were counted by Mr. Dubuisson they were in 
possession of the sheriff for safe keeping, under the office of the 
Clerk of the Fifth District Court. 

Mr. Behrens, who, witness was informed was one of the commission¬ 
ers of election in the parish of Orleans, upon being informed that wit¬ 
ness had taken out an order to have the ballots recounted, told him that 
all the ballot boxes of the Sixth Ward were empty, or words to that 
effect. Witness was informed by Mr. Dubuisson of the number of 
ballot boxes that were empty. 

A. Dubuisson states on oath, that he is a resident of New Orleans; 

that he was appointed by the Sixth District Court of Orleans to 

count the ballots in the contested case of Charles Leaumont vs- 

Viavant Some three or four of the ballot boxes were found empty. 

On some of the Democratic tickets the name of Viavant was erased 

and the name of Charles Leaumont inserted in its stead, which votes 
\ * 7 

were counted by the commissioners of election for Viavant, when 
they should have been counted for Leaumont. 

Deputy sheriff Tournade was always present during the counting 
of said ballots. We commenced by taking one ballot box at a time, 
and counted the ballots one by one, keeping the tallies on slips of 
paper; in this way we went through with all the ballot boxes used in 
the parish of Orleans. 

After we had counted the ballots we put them back into the same 
ballot boxes from which we had taken them, and sealed the boxes 
the same as we found them. Some of the boxes w^ere not sealed 
when we received them; these we did not seal, but left them as they 
were. In these cases of the unsealed boxes, they showed that they 
had been originally sealed, but that the sealing had been broken be¬ 
fore they were turned over to us. Four of these boxes named as 
having the seals broken were empty, having no ballots in them. The 
room where we found the ballot boxes is in the building opposite 
Jackson Square, occupied by the courts and the sheriff of the parish 
of Orleans. 


the deputy sheriff, Mr. Tournade, was put in possession of the 
key of this room by the sheriff of the parish, and retained it during 
the entire time occupied in counting the ballots, except during the 
nights when said key was left in possession of the sheriff himself. 
After finishing the count, we left the boxes in the same room where 
we found them. The deputy sheriff locked the door in witness’ 
presence, and returned the key to the sheriff. 

The whole number of ballot boxes was fifty-three or fifty-four. Of 
this number, about thirty-five were sealed; the balance were un¬ 
sealed. 

The ballot boxes found empty were from polls one and two, thir¬ 
teenth precinct, and poll one, fourteenth precinct. 

Mr. Behrens, one of the commissioners or registrars, told witness: 
“ You will find some of those boxes empty.” Witness said, “ How ?” 
B. replied: “We have put them aside there,’’ or, “they have put 
them aside there (meaning the ballots) where we counted the bal¬ 
lots.” Witness said, “Where?’’ B. said, “Down there in the 
room.’’ 

Behrens knew some of the boxes were empty before this count 
commenced, because he told witness so in presence of Judge Yia- 


vant. 

According to this count— 

Charles Leaumont received. 14,826 

Yiavant received... 14,623 

« 

Majority for Leaumont. 203 

According to the returns from military headquarters— 

Charles Leaumont received. 14,355 

Yiavant received. 14,361 

Majority for Yiavant. 12 


John W. Munday and P. Z. Canoge state on oath, that they re¬ 
ceived orders from the “ Committee on the conduct of the late elec¬ 
tion, and condition of peace and order in the State,” to proceed, 
with the sergeant-at-arms and a messenger from said committee, to 
the office of sheriff Maxwell to receive and receipt for all ballot 
boxes, papers and records that might be in his possession or charge, 
pertaining to the election of the seventeenth and eighteenth of April, 
1868. Certain objections were made by William Walsh, deputy 
sheriff, to delivering them up. Subsequently, however, witness took 
charge of fifty-four (54) ballot boxes and conveyed them to the 










office of the aforesaid committee and delivered them over to said 
committee. Ten (10) of these boxes witness found open, with no 
contents; ten (10) were locked without being sealed; thirty-four 
(84) were sealed on top and locked, and all were in a bad condition. 

J. P. L. Thompson and Edward Tinchart state on oath, that they 
were appointed to examine the ballot boxes used in the parish of 
Orleans at the election of April 17 and 18, 1868; that they have ex¬ 
amined fifty-four (54) boxes; forty-three (43) of said boxes were 
locked and found to be empty; ten (10) boxes were unlocked and 
empty, and one box contained eight tickets, viz: four Democratic, 
two (2) Workingmen’s and two (2) Republican. Several of the 
boxes were in bad condition, the lids being broken off, or the nails 
drawn from them; the bottoms of some of the boxes were split 
open. The key holes of all the boxes appeared to have been sealed, 
but the seals were either torn off or broken through. No key hole 
was found sealed when witness examined them. 

New Orleans, Dec. 15, 18G8. 

P. Z. Canoge states on oath, that he is employed by the Com¬ 
mittee on the Conduct of the late Elections and the condition of 
Peace and Order of the State, as an officer to serve summonses and 
attachments; that on the 24th day of November, 1868, he received a 
summons to serve on T. L. Maxwell, civil sheriff, which he left at 
said Maxwell’s office, taking the receipt of some deputy sheriff for 
same. 

On the second day of December, 18G8, witness received another 
summons to serve on said T. L. Maxwell, which he left at his office. 

On the fifteenth day of December, 1868, witness received an at¬ 
tachment to serve on said T. L. Maxwell, which he served. Maxwell 
refused to accept it, saying, “ Go away; I don’t want anything to do 
with you.” 

T. L. Maxwell, sheriff of the parish of Orleans, being duly sworn, 
deposes and says : 1 am a citizen of the State of Louisiana and a 
duly registered voter. 

Question by Mr. Campbell. Please state if you have in your pos¬ 
session any information as to the disposition made of the ballots, 
records of election and other contents of the ballot boxes which 
were used in the election of April, 1868, in this parish, and which 
were, by the order of General Buchanan, placed in the hands of the 
sheriff for safe keeping ? 


Answer. I believe, to the best of my knowledge, that the ballots 
relating to that*election are in my warehouse now. 

Question. Please state the condition in which they are ? 

Answer. I have no knowledge of their condition, personally. 

Question. State from what place they were conveyed to this 
warehouse ? 

Answer. I cannot say from personal knowledge. 

Question. State at what time they were taken there ? 

Answer. I cannot say. 

Question. State how you know they are in the warehouse? 

Answer. From information received. 

Question. State from whom it was received ? 

Answer. I decline to answer. The reason 1 decline to answer is 
for fear of injuring others, and the other reason is for fear of injuring 
myself. 

* 

Question. State the nature of the injury you apprehend to your¬ 
self. 

Answer. I apprehend that answering the question would leave 
me liable to impeachment by the Legislature, as from information 
received they are attempting to find a ground-work on which to 
base a charge to address me out of the office I now hold as sheriff' of 
the parish of Orleans. 

Question. State the injury you apprehend for other parties. 

Answer. Persecution at the hands of the Legislature. 

Question. State, if you please, from whose information you have 
knowledge of the present whereabouts of the ballots. 

Answer. I decline to answer, for the same reason stated above. 

Question. State at what time you became informed of the where¬ 
abouts of the ballots. 

Answer. On or about the first of August, 18G8. 

Question. State if this was subsequent to the time of the first 
conversation between yourself and me upon that subject. 

Answer. It was a very short time before; I was not positive at 
the time that I possessed the information. 

Question. State if you remember at that time of answering a 
question of mine in regard to this subject. 

Answer. I remember regarding the question of Mr. Campbell, as 
to whether I was in official possession, or ever had been, of said 
ballots. That they had never been in my official possession; that 
15 


114 


I never had seen the ballots or ballot boxes, and that they had not 
been transferred to me by the retiring sheriff, George W. Avery. 

Question. State what you know in regard to the repairing of the 
room where the ballots were kept subsequent to your taking the 
office ? 

Answer. Mr. d’Armas simply stated to me that the room wanted 
repairing, and I ordered it done. The origin of the repairs was 
brought about by repairing the next room to it, called a keeper’s 
room. I have never been in either room since I have held the office- 

Question. State if the records, books, etc., which were in the bal¬ 
lot boxes with the ballots, are now with the ballots ? 

Answer. I do not know. 

Question. State if you will comply with a summons from this 
committee to deliver into their possession the ballots referred to. 

Answer. [Note .—Reserves his answer until to-morrow, Decem¬ 
ber 17.] 

Question. State if you can and will guarantee that the said ballots 
and other documents which mav be in the warehouse referred to 

* / . j 

shall remain secure and undisturbed in the same condition as they 
now may be until to-morrow, December IT. 

Answer. I cannot guarantee it, because I cannot state positively 
that they are there. 

Question. State if you will comply with a requisition of this com¬ 
mittee to allow an officer of the committee to examine the condition 
of the said ballots forthwith ? 

Answer. I will at once. 

Question. You stated, in conversation, that you did not regard 
yourself as called upon to preserve or follow up records which might 
be manipulated to your disadvantage ? 

Answer. I did. 

Question—Please explain particularly your meaning in the phrase 
manipulated to your disadvantage. 

Answer. I was afraid that if the ballots relating to the spring- 
election found their way into the hands of the committee, that un¬ 
authorized persons might alter the lists and tallies of said election 
t > my disadvantage and claim to the office of sheriff, which I now 
hold by virtue of the declared result of said election, as my opponent 
has contested in a court of competent jurisdiction, and still con¬ 
tinues to question my right to hold said office by virtue of the de¬ 
clared result. 


I 


115 


Question. State if you recognize the authority of tiie General As¬ 
sembly, by a duly enacted law or resolution, through this commit¬ 
tee, to demand possession of and examine said ballots. 

Answer. I recognize the authority of this committee to send for 
persons and papers, but I question the legal justice of forcing me to 
injure myself and my dearest rights, given me by the voice of the 
people, to deliver papers which belong to a dead past, and cannot 
be regarded as records, and the delivery of which might work to my 
disadvantage. In this answer I would disclaim any intention of re¬ 
flecting on the moral honesty or intentions of any member of this 
committee. 

Question. In your term unauthorized persons, you do not mean 
to include the members of the committee. 

Answer. I do not. 

Question. You state you have no personal knowledge of the pre¬ 
sent condition of said ballots; state if you have any such knowledge 
from information. 

Answer. I have. 

Question. State the information. 

Answer. I decline for the same reasons given before. 


New Orleans, December 17, 1868. 

Continuation of Examination of 1. L. Maxwell , Sheriff. 

Question. Please give your answer to the question to which you 
reserved your reply yesterday. 

Answer. I would respectfully decline to comply to the summons 
from the committee, I would only respect an order of court for their 
delivery. 

Question. Please state the reasons which you have just given in 
conversation. 

Answer. From information received, I come to the conclusion 
that the ballots referred to have ceased to be good vouchers for the 
correctness of the returns of the last election, from the fact that 
they have been recounted in the case of the contest, Yiavant 
vs. Leaumont, and which count was too carelessly and loosely con¬ 
ducted, and said ballots having passed out of the hands of the sheriff 
of the parish, at that time, having never been 'retransferred, and 
consequently have lost their power as evidence regarding the last 
election, and could only be used now to my disadvantage. 



116 


Question. State whether your statement that the recount in the 
case of Leaumont vs. Viavant was carelessly and loosely conducted, 
is from your own personal knowledge. 

Answer. It is not. 

Question. State why you allowed the ballots to be removed from 
the room in the court house to your warehouse. 

Answer. I had nothing to do with it. 

Question. State who removed them. 

Answer. I do not know positively. 

Question. State if you have any knowledge by information of the 
party who removed them. 

Answer. I decline to answer. 

(Signed) THOS. L. MAXWELL. 

Sworn and subscribed before me, this seventeenth day of Decem¬ 
ber, 1868. H. J. CAMPBELL, Chairman. 

A true copy. 

W. Gr. James states, on oath, that in obedience to an order of the 
committee on the conduct of the late election and condition of peace 
and order in this State, he this day called on Thomas L. Maxwell, 
Esq., sheriff of the parish of Orleans, Louisiana, and repaired with 
him to the sheriff’s public warehouse, on Toulouse street, near Royal, 
and there found six (6) sacks, said to contain all the ballots cast at 
the election held in said parish of Orleans on the seventeenth and 
eighteenth days of April, 1868, together with the tally lists for said 
election, which he there sealed up in the presence of Joshua Cor- 
prew, deputy sheriff for said Maxwell, without any further examina¬ 
tion, and left them in the said warehouse for future disposition. 

Dr. George W. Avery, late sheriff of the parish of Orleans, being 
duly sworn, deposes and says: I am a citizen of the State of Loui¬ 
siana. »■' 

Question. State, if you please, all the circumstances in connec¬ 
tion with the receipt by you, as sheriff of the parish of Orleans, of 
the ballot boxes and their contents, which were used in the election 
on the seventeenth and eighteenth of April, 1868; their subsequent 
safe keeping and transfer to your successor in office; also, any dis¬ 
position that may have been made in your knowledge of ballots and 
records contained in said boxes. 

Answer. On the second of May, 1868, I received from military 
headquarters, circular 15, wherein it was ordered that all ballot 


i 


117 


boxes be transferred for safe keeping- to the sheriff of Orleans, who 
will be held for their safe keeping. And it was further directed that 
receipts be given by said Sheriff Avery, and filed at military head¬ 
quarters. The ballot boxes were all sealed when delivered to me, 
and I gave my receipt therefor without opening the ballot boxes or 
breaking the seals. In each case the receipt was worded thus: 
“Said to contain so many ballots.’’ I stored all the ballot boxes in a 
secure room that has been used for the purpose for many years, the 
key of which was in the possession of Deputy Sheriff d’Armas, 
who alone used this room as a place of storage for documents per¬ 
taining to the sheriff’s office. On the fifth of June I was directed 
by order of General Buchanan to recount the ballots, for the pur¬ 
pose of verifying the election of Judge Leaumont. This occupied my 
deputy up to the twenty-seventh day of June. Till then no one 
could have tampered with the ballot boxes without my knowledge. 
The same care and supervision was exercised in preserving the bal¬ 
lot boxes from molestation from the twenty-seventh of June up to 
the time I vacated my office, as ever had been. I turned over to 
my successor, Thomas L. Maxwell, all books, and papers and other 
properties appertaining to the sheriff’s office, on the first of July 
1868. It has ever been the custom for the sheriff of Orleans to be 
the custodian of the ballot boxes belonging to the parish, and for 
each sheriff to receive them from his immediate predecessor without 
giving or receiving receipts. By special injunction from me, my 
deputy, Mr. d’Armas, was ever vigilant in guarding the room from 
molestation when the ballot boxes were stored. After the ballots 
had been counted in the case of Judge Leaumont, I visited the room 
wherein were stored the ballot boxes, for a personal examination, 
and for the security of the ballots therein contained; and from the 
examination, and also from the solemn assurance of Gustave Tour- 
nade, my deputy whom I had designated for the duty of recounting 
the ballots in the case of Leaumont vs. Yiavant, I became perfectly 
satisfied the ballots were safely redeposited in the ballot boxes, 
which were secured by lock, and the room in which they were stored 
was carefully locked and the key of which was placed in the care of 
Deputy Sheriff d’Arm as. I am positive that no one could have 
broken into that room without my knowledge during my official 
responsibility for those ballot boxes; and furthermore, to the best of 
my knowledge and belief, I did transmit those ballot boxes, with the 
ballots therein contained, to my successor in office. 


118 



in regard to wliat disposition shall be made of ballots and ballot 
boxes. 



fully count and make duplicate returns of the result of the election; 
stating also in four separate lists, respectively, the number of white 
voters for, the number of colored voters for, and the number of each 
against the Constitution. The ballots will then be replaced in the 
ballot boxes, which will be sealed, and, together with the registra¬ 
tion and election records, will be carried by one of the commission¬ 
ers to the courthouse, or place designated, and turned over to the 
Board of Registrars. 

“ The board will then carefully count and make duplicate returns 
of the votes cast, in the manner prescribed for commissioners of 
election, and will see whether the vote of each precinct corresponds 
with the record of the commissioners. 

“The ballots will then be replaced in the ballot boxes, which will 
be sealed, and, together with the registration and election records, 
turned over to such parish officer or member of the registra¬ 
tion board as said board may select, who will receipt therefor, and 
will be held responsible for the same. The ballot boxes were turned 
over to my successor, sheriff Maxwell, in the same condition as they 
were in when we finished the recount in the case of Leaumont v. 
Viavant. 

Question. State if you please what rule you adopted in appointing 
your deputy sheriffs for the election ? 

Answer. I used my best efforts to secure such men as would prove 
of value in preserving the peace. 

Question. Please state the names of the deputy sheriffs appointed. 


GEORGE W. AYERY, 

Late Sheriff parish Orleans. 


(Signed) 


New Orleans, November 23, 1808. 

Sworn and subscribed before me, this twenty-third November, 


1868. 


(Signed) 

I certify this is a true copy. 
A. A. Stone. 


HUGH J. CAMPBELL, Chairman. 


119 


Thomas Hanley states on oath, that as a policeman, his duties kept 
him employed on the levee at the foot of Canal street during the late 
election of April 17 and 18, 1868; colored men, whose names he does 
not know, came down to the levee 1'or the purpose of hunting up 
persons to vote the Radical Republican ticket. These men had the 
regular printed tickets of the Radical party, and they urged quite a 
number of negroes to go to the polls. They had wagons to carry 
these persons to the polls. Some colored men objected to go to the 
polls, because, as they said, they had not been registered, and had no 
registration papers. The Radical canvassers told these men that 
their having no papers w T ould make no difference, but to come with 
them and they w T ould fix them up at Radical Headquarters. Witness 
saw several persons enlisted as above stated, go off with the can¬ 
vassers, in their wagons. Witness resides at No. 257| Perdido street. 


PARISH OF RAPIDES. 

A. F. Wild, a prominent citizen of the parish of Rapides, in his 
affidavit before this committee, says: 

The last registration in Rapides was very unfair and unjust, for 
the reason that the board allowed men to register who held offices 
before the w*ar—such as postmasters, sheriffs, police jurors, etc., 
and then went into the Confederate army; while on the other hand 
they turned away a large number of colored men under the plea that 
they were not twenty-one years old, when it was perfectly apparent, 
in most cases, that they were, and, in thirteen instances, they offered 
to prove it, but no proof would be accepted. 

W. B. Phillips, another prominent citizen of this parish, in his 
affidavit before this committee, says: 

Regarding elections, there was no fairness and but little freedom. 
The colored citizens were often constrained through fear to vote 
contrary to their judgment and wishes, as many did at the election 
held on the seventeenth and eighteenth days of April, 1868. The 
spirit of the emancipation proclamation is not yet fully acquired. 

The planters on Bayou Bceuf, up to the time of the election of 
delegates to the Convention, spoke of the colored men as still their 
property, and said they would use their guns to prohibit parties from 
giving' them any instructions ; and as the administrators of the law 



are ex-officers and soldiers of the so-called Confederate government, 
they have neglected to use that arm of strength for the protection of 
loyal men, but have used it for the protection of those who violated 
law by their abuse of persons who advocated the equal rights of all 
men, and Congressional reconstruction. 

George Buttrick states on oath, that he was an assistant sub- 
assistant commissioner of the Freedman’s Bureau in Alexandria. 

That he was there present during the election of April 17 and 18, 
1868. 

That many of the colored people were so greatly intimidated and 
frightened by the horrible murders of their comrades, and the re¬ 
peated threats of the white men, that they did not dare to vote. In 
some precincts none of them voted. 

That a few days previous to the election, threatening handbills 
were posted near the houses of every Republican in the parish. 

That the special police appointed by the mayor for the occasion, 
went around and searched every colored man’s house for arms, which’ 
they took away if found; but took none from white men, except in 
one case, that being the Republican nominee for clerk of the court. 


PARISH OF ST. BERNARD. 

John T. Burgess states on oath, that on the seventeenth and 
eighteenth days of April, 1868, he was at the poll of the first pre¬ 
cinct, parish of St. Bernard, and that he gave into the hands of 
voters at said poll eighty-five Republican tickets. 

Witness saw the said eighty-five tickets handed to the commis¬ 
sioners of election by the electors and saw them deposited in the 
ballot box. He saw the ballot box opened on the eighteenth instant 
and the ballots counted, but of these eighty-five tickets which he 
had seen deposited therein, only twenty-seven were found. 

A. G. Thornton, a resident of the parish of St, Bernard, states on 
oath, that lie handed to voters at the poll of the eighth precinct, 
seventy-eight Republican tickets which he saw deposited in the 
ballot box of said precinct. The official returns of this precinct show 
but fifty-seven Republican ballots. 

John McOomb, a resident of the parish of St. Bernard, states on 
oath, that he was a commissioner of election at the poll in the 



Seventh precinct of the parish; that on the seventeenth and 
eighteenth days of April, 18G8, Dr. F. H. Knapp, candidate for rep¬ 
resentative in the Legislature, invited him to his house to pass the 
night; witness accepted, and while at bis house, said Dr. Knapp 
entered the room where he was, and awaking him called him out on 
the gallery of the house and said that he had thought of a plan to 
defeat the other party. Witness asked what it was. He (Dr. 
Knapp) replied “that their tickets could be taken out of the box 
and others substituted.” Witness replied, “not if I know it,’’ and 
turned and walked into his room. Witness further states that he 
belongs to the Democratic party.” 


PARISH OF ST. LANDRY. 

S. A. Miller states on oath, that on the seventeenth and eighteenth 
days of April, 1808, one William O. Robinson, who was acting as 
deputy sheriff in the second ward, parish of St. Landry, did seat 
himself on the table, where the ballot box was, and asked many 
colored men to let him sec their tickets, and while leaning on the 
ballot box would look at it, fold it up, and instead of handing back 
the same ticket would hand back another with the Radical State 
officers’ names on it, but having the regular Democratic candidates’ 
names for parish offices, and the words “against the constitution,” 
at the bottom. Steamboatmen were allowed to vote the Democratic 
ticket for town council and ward offices, some of whom claimed 
their residence in New Orleans, and never did claim* a residence in 
the parish of St. Landry. At the close of the second day of election 
nearly every white man was armed, and showed a disposition to 
intimidate colored voters, unless they could be persuaded to vote 
the Democratic ticket. One Morgan, a commissioner of election, in 
the town of Washington, required every man to be a resident of the 
town of Washington for thirty days previous to the election, in order 
for him to vote for town council. 

The Democratic candidates received on the tally list in and for 
said corporation more than forty white votes mote than there was 
white voters in said corporation. Dr. Robertson, in witness’ pre¬ 
sence, took more than forty Republican tickets from colored voters, 
which they held ready to vote, giving them in return Radical tickets, 
1G 



with tho Democratic ticket pasted at tiie bottom. One Jacob told 
witness that he had tom off the words “for the constitution’’ on 
some of the colored voters’ tickets, and admitted that they knew 
nothing about it. 

Victor Dauphir, Samuel C. Johnson and William Thompson, state 
on oath, that the sworn statement of Mr. S. A. Miller, which was read 
to them, is correct in every particular, and that they heard said V T . 
A. Robinson say that he had taken out of the hands of colored voters 
ninety-six of their votes, and substituted ninety-six with the words 
“ against the constitution,’’ and having the Democratic ticket pasted 
at the bottom. 

John Simms states on oath, that he was selected by the Republi¬ 
can party to challenge those not entitled to vote, at the poll in pre¬ 
cinct 1, in the town of Opelousas. The first man challenged was 
one A. H. Graddenigs, who had fought a duel. The commissioners 
of election called F. G. Compton, one of the registrars for the parish 
of St. Landry, who decided that the poll was not the place to chal¬ 
lenge—that it should have been done at the time he registered; and 
that no registered person could be challenged. 

Many legal votes were refused and many illegal votes cast; many 
certificates of registration were taken away from colored voters, on 
the plea that they were not twenty-one, or some slight difference 
between their signature and their names as written in the certificate. 
J. W. Hudspeth, a white man living in Opelousas, voted with a 
colored certificate of registration; also, one Dubin Gregorio, of Ope¬ 
lousas voted on the seventeenth and voted again on the eighteenth 
instant. 

Twenty-nine illegally registered persons voted and six legally 
registered were deprived of voting at precinct No. 1, in Opelousas. 

, F. J. Davy, Felix Lessassier, G. Donati and Judge Lemelle state 
on oath, that they are residents and duly registered voters of the 
parish of St. Landry, Louisiana, and that the statement of John 
Simms is correct in every particular. 

Louis George Bimier states on oath, that he saw the commission¬ 
ers of election at the sixth precinct leave their posts and electioneer 
for the Democratic ticket. A colored man asked for a Republican 
ticket, and was given a Democratic. The poll was established at the 
store of Joseph Chevier and Valentino Sauvie, where liquor was 
freely given to all those who voted the Democratic ticket. He heard 


several persons say publicly that they had told the colored people 
that if they voted the Republican ticket they would kill them. 

Cornelius Donald states on oath, that on the seventeenth or eight¬ 
eenth day of April, 1868, in Washington, St. Landry parish, he saw 
Dr. Robertson take a ticket from a voter and exchange it for another. 
When he (witness) saw this, he told several voters that they must 
not hand their tickets to any one. Dr. Robertson said lie knew wit¬ 
ness had seen him change one ticket, and added, “ I confess that I 
not only changed one, but I did it fifty times since morning, because 
if we don’t do it our party is gone,” meaning the Democratic party. 

A. Goriu states on oath, that he was at the second ward poll on 
the eighteenth day of April, 1868, and that William A. Robinson an 
acting deputy sheriff was sitting on the table which held the ballot 
box and kept a sheet of paper over the box with his hands for at 
least three-fourths of an hour and would not remove it, except when 
some one would shove it aside to deposit their ballot, he also took 
ballots out of the hands of timid men, especially colored men, ex¬ 
change them and then hand them to the judges of election; colored 
men were not allowed to vote freely at this poll. 

Theogem Castille states on oath, that he knows Thomas C. Ander¬ 
son of St. Landry parish, La., who was declared elected by General 
Order, No. 121, from Head Quarters, Fifth Military District, as 
“ State Senator,’’ and he also knows that said Anderson is the man 
who was elected and served as a member of the Legislature of this 
State in the years 1860 and 1861, and that he afterwards accepted 
and served under a commission as quartermaster in the rebel army, 
at camp Pratt, in the parish of St. Martin, in 1862. 

Theophile Simms and Antonio Estorge state on oath, that they 
took the names of one hundred and twenty-eight (128) colored 
voters, to whom they gave regular Republican tickets, and that they 
saw them vote the same at the twelfth precinct in St. Landry parish; 
the returns show but ninety ballots cast for the Constitution, in 
said precinct. 

Edgar Vienhille, on oath, verifies the testimony of Theophile Simms 
and Antonio Estorge. 

Zachariali Stewart, on oath, states that previous to the election, ho 
was employed as a laborer by the firm of William A. Anderson & 
Co., doing business in the parish of St. Landry. On the sixteenth 
day of April, 1868, Henry Lastrap, a member of said firm, showed 


124 


witness two twenty dollar gold pieces, and asked him if lie was going 
to vote tlic Radical ticket. He replied that he did not know how he 
should vote, but would vote as Washington Brown voted. Mr. Las- 
trap replied, “ God damn George Washington ; he is a Radical ; if 
you will vote as I do, for the Democratic ticket, I will give you one 
of these twenty dollar gold pieces.” Witness refused, and was then 
offered both of the gold pieces; he refused the last offer also; upon 
which, Lastrap said, with an oath, “ If you vote the Radical ticket, 
I will discharge you, and will never give you any employment again, 
if you are starving to death.” Immediately after this conversation, 
Mr. Robinson, of the same firm, informed witness that if he voted 
the Radical ticket, he could consider himself discharged; witness did 
vote the Radical ticket in presence of two of his employers, and was 
immediately discharged, with no other reasons given than that ho 
had voted the Radical ticket. 

F. J. Avy, on oath, states that on the eighteenth day of April, 
18G8, he was at the poll in the seventeenth ward and saw about 
fifteen voters whom he knew rejected on the plea that there was a 
slight difference between their names and the name written on tlio 
certificate of registration, which was occasioned by improper spell¬ 
ing on the part of the registrars. About fifty men were deprived of 
voting by an order from the chairman of the Board of Registration 
issued to the commissioners of election at that poll, at twelve o’clock 
M., not to allow any one to vote who lived out of that ward. 

Noah Douglass and Charles E. Nash, on oath state, that they 
were present at the poll on Bayou Cheat and took the names of 
persons and number of registration certificates of forty-one colored 
voters and gave each of them a Republican ticket headed “ for the 
constitution” and saw them vote the same, yet the return of said 
precinct, as reported to the Board of Registrars, show only nineteen 
colored votes for the constitution. 

W. Walker Tlieopolitc, Jr., and Edgar Vanliill state, that on the 
seventeenth and eighteenth days of April, 18G8, they took the names 
and number of their registration certificates of one hundred and 
thirty colored voters and issued Republican tickets headed “ for the 
constitution” to them, which they saw them deposit in the ballot 
box at the poll in the twelfth precinct, yet the official report from 
said poll shows but ninety colored votes for the constitution. One 
colored man was prevented from voting on the plea that he was 


125 


under twenty-one years of age. He was going to vote the Republi¬ 
can ticket. Before night the same man was allowed to vote the 
Democratic ticket. 

Oliver Derbanne and Antoine Ledet state on oath, that at the 
sixth precinct ballots were exchanged publicly after having left the 
voters’ hands. 

Lufroy Pierre, Auguste and Louis Chariot voted at said poll, they 
being disfranchised by serving a term in the penitentiary. 

W. G. Bell, Philip Filot, John Simms, F. J. D’Avy and Ludger 
Lcmelle state on oath, that at precinct one a great many duly regis¬ 
tered voters were rejected. Certificates of registration were taken 
from colored voters by the commissioners on the mere request of 
white men. The vote of one colored man was rejected after he had 
made oath before a magistrate that he had lost his certificate of 
registration, and the commissioners, knowing positively that duly 
registered white men voted with colored men’s certificates, and some 
who voted on the seventeenth were allowed to vote again on the 
eighteenth instant. Quito a number of disfranchised persons were 
allowed to vote. One colored man, seventy years of ago, who was 
duly registered, was rejected at said poll on the plea that he was not 
naturalized. 

Randall Morgan and Simon Taylor state on oath, that they went 
to the poll at Chicot on election day with twenty-three other voters. 
Twenty-three out of the twenty-five voted the Republican ticket, 
headed ‘“'For the Constitution.” The return from said poll showed 
but nineteen Republican votes for the constitution. 

Revolvers and guns were common at said poll. The threats and 
the sight of firearms prevented many colored men from voting. 

Twenty-six citizens of this parish protest against the returns of 
the election, as said election was unfair, unjust and illegal. 


PARISH OF ST. MARTIN. 

L. E. Laloni states on oath, that on the seventeenth and eigh¬ 
teenth of April, 1868, he was acting as deputy supervisor of election 
for the parish of St. Martin, appointed as such by the Board of 
Registration of said parish. That the registrars of voters, and com¬ 
missioners of election, appointed by them, acting in concert with the 
Democratic party, committed frauds on a large scale. 






12G 


Witness heard a commissioner of election say that the Democratic 
party knew they could not defeat the Republican party fairly, but 
that there was another way by which to defeat them. That other 
way, as witness discovered on the second day of election, was, that 
the commissioners of election at St. Martinsville and other precincts, 
had an understanding to, and did refuse without the slightest motive, 
such a number of Republican votes as would secure to the Demo¬ 
cratic party a largo majority in the parish. 

That persons having their registration papers, whose names were 
not erased from the list, and who intended, as they told witness, to 
vote the Republican ticket in full, were denied the right of voting, 
on the idle pretext that they were too old, or that they were born 
under the Spanish government, and were Spanish sujects. Others 
were apparently too young, or under twenty-one years of age, although 
they had made due proofs of their being of full age before the Board 
of Registrars. 

Others were refused the right of voting, because it was alleged 
that they did not reside in the ward where they offered to vote, which 
was not the fact. 

Witness was appointed registrar of voters by Major General P. 
Sheridan; is thoroughly acquainted with the people of said parish, 
and as such, the duty devolved upon him to receive the registration 
list of the first board appointed under the reconstruction acts. That 
he did so concicntiously, as he knew the antecedents of almost every 
man in the parish. Struck out of said registration list the names of 
about forty persons, assigning the reasons for so doing. 

That the second Board of Registration, appointed by General W. 
S. Hancock, having for its chairman an ex-Confederate officer, regis¬ 
tered almost all who had been stricken out by the first board, and 
went so far as to register persons clearly disfranchised, who had not 
even dared to offer to register before the first board. That almost 
all these disfranchised citizens voted the Democratic ticket, or did 
not vote at all. 

That on the eighteenth of April, 18G8, the second day of election, 
when deponent went to St. Martinsville to vote, he was arrested and 
searched on crossing the ferry, by a picket of men pretending to 
act under orders of the sheriff. His arms were taken away from him. 
When near the court house, where the polls were held, he was again 
arrested and searched by a company of men, all white Democrats 
and noted rebels. 


A good many of theni arc disfranchised. They were all well arm¬ 
ed with double barrel shot guns and revolvers, numbering about 
sixty, and also pretending to act under orders from the sheriff. 

The Republicans were not allowed to go near the polls, unless in¬ 
vited to do so in cases where it was thought they could be influ¬ 
enced. This armed company allowed Aliciad Deblanc, Alexander 
Dedonel and Valsin A. Fournit, three disfranchised citizens, who 
were active in working against the Republican party, to remain near 
the polls. 

That in regard to the sixty-two affidavits taken before me, as 
deputy supervisor, all those persons intended to vote the republican 
ticket in full, in a ballot box opened by the board of supervisors of 
registration; that this’private election would have been continued if 
it were not that deponent was taken sick the next day. 

Deponent further swears, that had the election in the parish of 
St. Martins been carried on fairly, without fraud or intimidation, 
he sincerely believes that the republican ticket would have received 
a majority of at least one hundred votes. 

The registrations in the parish were about three thousand and one 
hundred, of which fourteen hundred were whites and seventeen 
hundred were colored voters. Deponent believes that about six 
hundred colored voters did not vote. 

Mr. S. Bryant did not hold any office before the rebellion, but was 
an officer in the Yellow Jacket Confederate Battalion over a year. 
Deponent believes he was adjutant in said battalion, and a candi¬ 
date on the Democratic ticket. He, like the balance of the party, 
opposed flie ratification of the present Constitution, and deponent is 
satisfied that he always opposed the reconstruction of the State un¬ 
der the plan proposed by the Congress of the United States. 

I am a native of Louisiana, and for the last sixteen years I have 
resided in the parish of St. Martin, and am well acquainted with 
the people of said parish. 

In a letter to Major General R. C. Buchanan the supervisors of 
election state that they have done all that was in their power to de¬ 
tect the frauds perpetrated on the days of election of April 17 and 
18, 18(18, and have arrived at the conclusion that the election in the 
parish of St. Martin should be declared null and void—for the fol¬ 
lowing reasons: 

First —Because notices of election were not given as the law re- 


128 


quires, in the newspapers published in the parish. The first notice 
given were handbills posted in but very few places, and that not 
before Monday the thirteenth of April, only four days before the 
election, the said handbills did not mention what ivas most important 
for the voter to know, to-wit, the places- where the polls would be 
established. The notices only stated that “polls would be estab¬ 
lished” at places such as Cotaux, which is a portion of this parish 
from eight to nine miles in breadth; some of the registrars announced 
verbally that the Cotaux polls would be opened at Cleophas Rome¬ 
ro’s store, and on the day of election they were transferred to 
Joseph Gario’s, without notice to that effect. 

Second —No mention was made in said handbills as to the number 
of boxes in which to vote; it was understood that the votes “For’’ 
or “Against the Constitution/ 7 and all officers to be voted for under 
its provisions, would be cast in one box according to special order 
No. G3, Headquarters Fifth Military District, which reads as follows: 
“The ballots to be cast for or against the Constitution” shall have 
on them printed, or in writing, the names of the several officers 
voted for under its provisions, etc., etc. 

The said order was not executed by the registrars and commis¬ 
sioners, some of them requiring the votes to bo cast into one box> 
and others in three different boxes. 

At St. Martinsville the polls superintended by C. Derneuville 
Oliver, chairman of the Board of Registration, votes were cast in 
three different boxes, and those voting Republican tickets having 
cast their votes in one box only (according to said order), these 
votes were not counted for justice of the peace and other corpora¬ 
tion officers. The undersigned declare that they attempted in vain 
to obtain from some of the registrars verbal in default of written 
information, as to places where polls would be established, and as 
to the number of boxes in which to vote; the invariable answer was 
“nothing has yet been decided by the board. 7 ’ It is a well known 
fact that the Democratic party organized in secret clubs with pass¬ 
words and signs, of which we are well informed said C. D. Oliver 
being a member of said clubs knew how the election would be con¬ 
ducted, and because the registrars and commissioners were ignorant 
of the division lines of the “police jury 7 ’ and “justice of the peace” 
wards of this parish, over two hundred and fifty Republicans were 


v 


refused the right of voting, it being alleged 
in the district in which they offered to vote. 

'Hind Because commissioners of election, most of whom regis¬ 
tered fraudulently, were, or pretended to he, ignorant of their duties, 
as defined by military orders, and acted on their own responsibility, 
assumed tho right of preventing about two hundred and fifty Repub¬ 
licans from voting, although they had their registration papers, for 
the following reasons, to wit : some were too old to be citizens, hav¬ 
ing been born in tho State when it was a colony 5 therefore, they 
decided, would have to be naturalized before being permitted to 
vote; even without proof of these personshaving been born under 
the French flag, they were refused on that ground; some were said 
to he too young, some to have fraudulent registration papers, and 
some were refused on alleged non-residence in the district. These 
objections were wholly unfounded, and were used solely to defeat 
the constitution and the reconstruction laws. The commissioners at 
St. Martinsville were, or pretended to he, totally ignorant of the 
division lines of the districts in the parish, and permitted Democrats 
to vote, and prevented Republicans from voting, although the for¬ 
mer and latter resided on the same plantation. They also retained 
registration papers, pronouncing them fraudulent. The}^ allowed 
themselves to he guided by the opinions and decisions of one Valsin 
Tournet, who, although disfranchised, was permitted, together with 
many other disfranchised and disloyal men, to surround the polls—- 
a right which was denied by the commissioners to Republicans, and 
loyal men as well as Republican candidates. This was done for the^ 
purpose of intimidating colored voters, and driving them from the 
polls. 

The sheriff of this parish, availing himself of certain powers 
which he pretended were vested in him by special order number 55, 
and by proclamation to the peoplo of Louisiana dated April 14,18G8, 
from headquarters fifth military district, summoned a force of about 
fifty white men, nearly all of whom belonged to the aforesaid secret 
Democratic organizations, armed with double barreled shot guns, 
whose instructions were to disarm every Republican voter who ap¬ 
proached the polls. These preservers of the peace would also insult 
peaceable citizens, who had no arms or means of defense. A pre¬ 
tense was made to search Democrats. This gang, some of whom 
belonged to tho noted guerilla company who boasted of having 
17 


they were non-residents 


130 


killed the first Union man on the soil of Louisiana, were on duty 
during the two days of election, to prevent loyal men from voting, 
and scare the freedmcn from the polls, and wore the old gray uni¬ 
form. The commissioners acted with partiality on the first day of 
the election; three Democrats to one Republican were permitted by 
the armed gang to go in at a time to vote, although the Republicans 
awaiting to enter were much more numerous. So all the Democratic 
votes were cast on the first day; and on the second day, there being 
only Republicans to vote, the commissioners managed to proceed so 
slowly that, when the polls were closed, at least one hundred and 
fifty Republicans did not vote, for want of time. The reason is, tha^ 
the commissioners permitted the rebel bystanders to object to every 
vote that was offered, on frivolous grounds, such as questioning the 
validity of registration certificates figuring on the index; about age; 
about residence; about district, and registration papers supposed to 
be fraudulent. This plan of intimidation was carried on with 
success; at least one hundred Republicans, in different districts, 
were prevented from even going near the polls, and did not vote, on 
account of the armed forces standing near the polls. Mr. Louis 
E. Laboirc, a candidate for parish judge, was arrested and searched 
twice before reaching the polls, and was grossly insulted at Fausse 
Pointe. We are well informed that this system of intimidation pre¬ 
vailed. The Republicans were searched, insulted and threatened of 
their lives if they did not vote the Democratic ticket. 

J. Dorville Broussard, a disfranchised rebel soldier, was allowed 
to register, and voted, together with Ernest Broussard, another dis¬ 
franchised rebel. They were appointed on a committee from their 
secret organization, to notify a white Republican by the name of 
Ovide E. Smith to leave the parish in twenty-four hours. 

Fourth —The new list of voters was not revised by the registrars 
of this parish, according to orders from headquarters, and the con¬ 
sequence was that about one hundred white persons fraudulently 
registered and voted. The Board of Registrars of this parish is to 
be blamed for registering persons who had been stricken from the 
list by the former board, for causes set forth in the registry books, 
satisfactory evidence of which had been furnished the former board 
and especially for registering Dr. Alf. Duperier, whose name had 
been stricken from the list by the former board for the following 

cause: “Having been a member of the State Legislature before 

* 


January 21, 18(31, and aided the rebellion by a loan of one thousand 
dollars to arm and equip men to prevent invasion by federal troops.” 

The registrars allowed every rebel to register, although they -were 
clearly disfranchised, and many under age were permitted to regis¬ 
ter; also, persons of foreign birth were allowed to register without 
producing their naturalization papers. They went as far as to regis¬ 
ter J. Dorville Broussard, whose antecedents are well known to the 
whole community, and specially to C. D. Oliver, chairman of the 
Board of Registrars. Said Broussard was State assessor before 
January 21, 1861, and afterwards served in the rebellion, and had 
office under the Confederate States government. 

Fifth —The registrars refused to grant new registration papers to 
many colored persons who had lost their certificates, because they 
could not remember their numbers, and many were refused the right 
to vote on that account. 

Sixth —The registrars did not open their office on the days and at 
the places mentioned in the notice given by them, and a good many 
colored citizens and Republicans were deprived of the chance to 
register, while Democrats were initiated into all the secrets of the 
Board of Registrars. 

We also call your attention to the fact that at St. Martinsville polls 
the first man voted was No. 138, and the last on that day 2484. On 
the second day the first was 166, and the last on that day was 110, 
as the books must show. We have also a clear account of every 
vote cast on the seventeenth and eighteenth of April, 1868, at St. 


Martinsville, to wit: 

For the constitution.324 

Against the constitution.* • • * 258 

Total votes.....'..582 


And when the votes were counted on Saturday night, April 18, 
1868, it was found to be as follows: 


For the constitution. 

Against the constitution... 

Total votes lawfully cast 


324 

302 

62 6 
582 


A fraud of votes 


44 










And it was well remarked, and can be proved, that on the eigh¬ 
teenth, when the polls were opened, the seals were broken. 

(Signed) EMILE DETIEGE, Chairman. 

SAMUEL WAKEFIELD, 

T. F. PENNE, 

Board of Supervisors, parish of St. Martin, Louisiana. 

Two hundred and seventy-eight signatures of citizens from St. 
Martin parish protest against the fraudulent election held in this 
parish on the seventeenth and eighteenth April, 18G8. 

A. R. Fran§ois states on oath, that during the election held on the 
seventeenth and eighteenth of April, 1868, in the parish of St. Mar¬ 
tinsville, at the polls in the town of St. Martinsville, he saw almost 
all the frauds, violence and intimidation that was practiced upon the 
citizens that proposed to vote the Republican ticket. 

The polls were surrounded by an armed gang of men, who showed 
hostile intentions. Those armed men were reported to be under the 
sheriff's control, and were composed of about fifty wdiite men, most 
all ex-officers of the rebel army. They were armed with double 
barrel shot guns, pistols, etc. Their orders w T ere to disarm every 
person who approached the polls, and this was violently practiced 
upon Republicans. This gang of armed men, among whom were 
some noted rebels, were on duty the two days of election solely to 
prevent colored Republicans from approaching the polls to vote freely. 

The commissioners of election also acted entirely in a party spirit. 
They allowed three Democrats to one Republican to enter the polls, 
and then the Republicans were rejected for some cause. Some were 
presumed to be too young, although they were willing to prove that 
they were over twenty-one years of age; others were rejected for 
being too old. Supposing them to have been born when this State 
w*as a colony under the French or Spanish government, therefore 
said persons would have to procure their naturalization papers be¬ 
fore they are entitled to vote. Many Republicans, who would have 
voted the regular Republican ticket, were prevented. Some were 
prevented also for non-residence, although the districts were marked 
on their certificates of registration. Upon these grounds the com¬ 
missioners prevented many Republicans from voting, and permitted 
Democrats, who live on the same plantations with Republicans, to 
vote. With some, their registration papers were retained and they 
not allowed to vote, because it was supposed to be fraudulently ob- 


133 


tamed, and by soule mistake, the name and Humber on the printed 
list from headquarters did not exactly correspond with their certifi¬ 
cates of registration, although with similar ones Democrats were al¬ 
lowed to vote. On the second day of the election, the commission¬ 
ers proceeded so slowly that when the polls were closed at least from 
a hundred to a hundred and fifty Republicans, who would have voted 
the regular Republican ticket, had not the chance to vote. The 
cause of this was, that the commissioners permitted Democrats and 
disfranchised rebel bystanders to challenge every Republican vote 
upon the most frivolous grounds, and by permitting all manner of 
questions to be put to the Republicans—such as, where were they 
born, the name of their former masters, and if they were christened 
in the Catholic church or not, to procure their christening papers to 
prove their age. All these questions were asked in the most insult¬ 
ing tone imaginable. 

On account of all these outrages, the Republicans, at a late hour, 
opened a separate poll to take in the votes of these who had not the 
' opportunity of voting, but had not time to do so. 

Mr. Laloni, one of the deputy supervisors for the parish of St. 
Martin, took the affidavits of about sixty Republicans, who would 
have voted the Republican ticket, but were prevented from doing so 
by the commissioners. 

Moreover, I have known Mr. Bryant as an officer in the Yellow 
Jacket Confederate States army. 


PARISH OF TERREBONNE. 

Frederic Morel, sheriff of the parish, testifies that he was a super¬ 
visor of election in said parish, on the seventeenth and eighteenth 
of April, 18G8. He, together with his co-supervisor, J. M. Vance, 
examined the books kept by the registrars appointed by the military 
authorities, and found that about thirty persons had been permitted 
to register who were not qualified as voters according to the recon¬ 
struction acts of Congress; that at most of the polls the commission¬ 
ers of election, according to their own statement, were opposed to 
the ratification of the constitution, and to the election of loyal 

citizens. 



134 


RAKISH OF WEST FELICIANA. 

[From the New Orleans Republican, April 28, 18G8.] 

“ During the election on April 17 and 18,1868, at the courthouse, 
where the boxes for the first, third, sixth and ninth wards were 
deposited, the Republicans were forbidden to come near the polls, 
and in many instances were told by the acting sheriff to get away; 
at the same time, leading Democrats were permitted to approach the 
polls, and did their best to make freedmen vote against the constitu¬ 
tion. The acting sheriff, Dr. Kaufman, while standing at the polls, 
took away the ticket of a freedman, named Henry Gray, and pre¬ 
sented to the commissioner a Democratic ticket, which was imme¬ 
diately stuck in the box. Henry Gray did all he could to prevent 
this, but as soon as the ticket was in the box, the sheriff took him 
away from the polls. 

“ At Concord Church precinct, the deputy sheriff, who was sent to 
preserve order and prevent electioneering, was seen by the super¬ 
visor of election stealing the regular tickets from the freedmen and 
giving them the green Democratic tickets. All sorts of promises 
were made to the freedmen, if they would vote the Democratic ticket. 
Dr. Kaufman offered as high as twenty dollars a piece to several 
freedmen to vote down the constitution.” 
















I' 



































, 










* 

. 



























• . 




























#* 
















